On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 20:25:57 +0530 Bharata B Rao <bhar...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 04:44:27PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:09:09 +0530 > > Bharata B Rao <bhar...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > This is v2.1 of "Core based CPU hotplug for PowerPC sPAPR". v2 was > > > posted here: > > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2016-03/msg00201.html > > > > > > I am making this v2.1 instead of v3 as this introduces a change in > > > device_add semantics and if we don't want to continue this, I > > > will go back to the previous v2 semantics from v3 onwards. v2 had > > > spapr-cpu-core device that served as CPU core device for all > > > types of PowerPCCPU threads. In this version however, > > > spapr-cpu-core becomes an abstract device and we will have > > > different core devices for each of the PowerPCCPU type. So in > > > this version, the hotplug semantics looks like this: > > > > > > (qemu) device_add > > > POWER8-spapr-cpu-core,id=core2,core=16[,threads=4] > > > > > > cpu_model specification is gone as it becomes redundant with > > > different core types for each CPU type. CPU core types are > > > defined only for host, POWER7 and POWER8 models only (and not for > > > their variants/aliases) yet. > > > > > > I have mostly taken care of all the review comments that I got > > > for v2. > > Could you rebase on top of current master, pls? > > Sure, I usually update, but missed it this time. > > > > > and fix compile error: > > hw/cpu/core.c: In function ‘core_prop_set_core’: > > hw/cpu/core.c:31:9: error: implicit declaration of function > > ‘error_propagate’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > error_propagate(errp, local_err); > > I don't see this when compiling all the targets either on x86 or PPC > systems. May be this is seen with latest master, in any case will > check this out when spinning next version. > > However do you have any specific comment to be addressed from this > version before I post the next one ? Sorry, I haven't had a spare time to review it yet. But device_add example looks good and similar what x86 will do, which is good from libvirt point of view as it would be able to implement hotplug in a uniform way for both targets. > > Regards, > Bharata. >
