wangyanan (Y) writes:
> Hi Cleber, > > On 2021/7/23 6:25, Cleber Rosa wrote: >> Yanan Wang writes: >> >>> In the SMP configuration, we should either specify a topology >>> parameter with a reasonable value (equal to or greater than 1) >>> or just leave it omitted and QEMU will calculate its value. >>> Configurations which explicitly specify the topology parameters >>> as zero like "sockets=0" are meaningless, so disallow them. >>> >>> However, the commit 1e63fe685804d >>> (machine: pass QAPI struct to mc->smp_parse) has documented that >>> '0' has the same semantics as omitting a parameter in the qapi >>> comment for SMPConfiguration. So this patch fixes the doc and >>> also adds the corresponding sanity check in the smp parsers. >>> >>> Suggested-by: Andrew Jones <drjo...@redhat.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Yanan Wang <wangyana...@huawei.com> >>> --- >>> hw/core/machine.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ >>> qapi/machine.json | 6 +++--- >>> qemu-options.hx | 12 +++++++----- >>> 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >> Hi Yanan, >> >> This looks somewhat similar to this very old patch of mine: >> >> https://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-10/msg03039.html >> >> I'm putting a reference here because I believe the test can be salvaged >> and slightly adapted for this patch of yours. >> >> Let me know if I can help anyhow. >> > Thanks for this. > I was introducing an unit test for the smp parsing in [1], in which all > possible valid and invalid smp configs were covered, and actually the > "parameter=0" stuff was also covered. You can have a look, and > suggestions are welcome. I'm not sure we need two different tests > for the same part. :) > Right, I only saw the other series later. Nice work there! - Cleber.