On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 10:39:38 PDT (-0700), finte...@gmail.com wrote:
Has there been testing with "-smp 2"? A while back I thought I read that the included uboot firmware was using a hard-coded device tree that indicated 4+1 CPUs, which I would have expected to cause Linux boot issues?
It works for me.
Jonathan On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 1:31 PM Palmer Dabbelt <pal...@sifive.com> wrote:On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 06:07:18 PDT (-0700), bmeng...@gmail.com wrote: > Hi Palmer, > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 3:00 AM Palmer Dabbelt <pal...@sifive.com> wrote: >> >> On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 08:25:21 PDT (-0700), bmeng...@gmail.com wrote: >> > Hi Palmer, >> > >> > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:33 PM Palmer Dabbelt <pal...@sifive.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, 06 Sep 2019 09:20:05 PDT (-0700), bmeng...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> > It is not useful if we only have one management CPU. >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> >> >> > Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.fran...@wdc.com> >> >> > >> >> > --- >> >> > >> >> > Changes in v8: None >> >> > Changes in v7: None >> >> > Changes in v6: None >> >> > Changes in v5: None >> >> > Changes in v4: None >> >> > Changes in v3: >> >> > - use management cpu count + 1 for the min_cpus >> >> > >> >> > Changes in v2: >> >> > - update the file header to indicate at least 2 harts are created >> >> > >> >> > hw/riscv/sifive_u.c | 4 +++- >> >> > include/hw/riscv/sifive_u.h | 2 ++ >> >> > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> > >> >> > diff --git a/hw/riscv/sifive_u.c b/hw/riscv/sifive_u.c >> >> > index 2947e06..2023b71 100644 >> >> > --- a/hw/riscv/sifive_u.c >> >> > +++ b/hw/riscv/sifive_u.c >> >> > @@ -10,7 +10,8 @@ >> >> > * 1) CLINT (Core Level Interruptor) >> >> > * 2) PLIC (Platform Level Interrupt Controller) >> >> > * >> >> > - * This board currently uses a hardcoded devicetree that indicates one hart. >> >> > + * This board currently generates devicetree dynamically that indicates at least >> >> > + * two harts. >> >> > * >> >> > * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it >> >> > * under the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License, >> >> > @@ -433,6 +434,7 @@ static void riscv_sifive_u_machine_init(MachineClass *mc) >> >> > * management CPU. >> >> > */ >> >> > mc->max_cpus = 4; >> >> > + mc->min_cpus = SIFIVE_U_MANAGEMENT_CPU_COUNT + 1; >> >> > } >> >> > >> >> > DEFINE_MACHINE("sifive_u", riscv_sifive_u_machine_init) >> >> > diff --git a/include/hw/riscv/sifive_u.h b/include/hw/riscv/sifive_u.h >> >> > index f25bad8..6d22741 100644 >> >> > --- a/include/hw/riscv/sifive_u.h >> >> > +++ b/include/hw/riscv/sifive_u.h >> >> > @@ -69,6 +69,8 @@ enum { >> >> > SIFIVE_U_GEM_CLOCK_FREQ = 125000000 >> >> > }; >> >> > >> >> > +#define SIFIVE_U_MANAGEMENT_CPU_COUNT 1 >> >> > + >> >> > #define SIFIVE_U_PLIC_HART_CONFIG "MS" >> >> > #define SIFIVE_U_PLIC_NUM_SOURCES 54 >> >> > #define SIFIVE_U_PLIC_NUM_PRIORITIES 7 >> >> >> >> This fails "make check", so I'm going to squash in this >> >> >> >> diff --git a/hw/riscv/sifive_u.c b/hw/riscv/sifive_u.c >> >> index ca9f7fea41..adecbf1dd9 100644 >> >> --- a/hw/riscv/sifive_u.c >> >> +++ b/hw/riscv/sifive_u.c >> >> @@ -528,6 +528,7 @@ static void riscv_sifive_u_machine_init(MachineClass *mc) >> >> mc->init = riscv_sifive_u_init; >> >> mc->max_cpus = SIFIVE_U_MANAGEMENT_CPU_COUNT + SIFIVE_U_COMPUTE_CPU_COUNT; >> >> mc->min_cpus = SIFIVE_U_MANAGEMENT_CPU_COUNT + 1; >> >> + mc->default_cpus = mc->max_cpus; >> > >> > Thank you for fixing the 'make check'. Shouldn't it be: >> > >> > mc->default_cpus = mc->min_cpus; >> >> We have 5 harts on the board that this matches, so I figured that'd be the >> better default. >> > > Per my understanding mc->default_cpus is used when invoking QEMU > without passing '-smp n' (that's what 'make check' uses), and with the > updated sifive_u machine, '-smp 2' is the actual useful configuration > to boot Linux. For consistency with user experience on other machines, > without '-smp' means we want a uni-processor machine hence I would > suggest we set "mc->default_cpus = mc->min_cpus". OK, I've spun a v3. I never sent out v2 but I had tagged it, unless there's any opposition I'll send this out when I'm back on normal internet.
