On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 12:12:16PM +1000, David Gibson wrote: > On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 03:48:10PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 08:54:35AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > On 10.06.2016 19:40, Andrew Jones wrote: > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <drjo...@redhat.com> > > > > --- > > > > qom/cpu.c | 8 ++++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/qom/cpu.c b/qom/cpu.c > > > > index 751e992de8823..024cda3eb98c8 100644 > > > > --- a/qom/cpu.c > > > > +++ b/qom/cpu.c > > > > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ > > > > #include "exec/log.h" > > > > #include "qemu/error-report.h" > > > > #include "sysemu/sysemu.h" > > > > +#include "hw/qdev-properties.h" > > > > > > > > bool cpu_exists(int64_t id) > > > > { > > > > @@ -342,6 +343,12 @@ static int64_t cpu_common_get_arch_id(CPUState > > > > *cpu) > > > > return cpu->cpu_index; > > > > } > > > > > > > > +static Property cpu_common_properties[] = { > > > > + DEFINE_PROP_INT32("nr-cores", CPUState, nr_cores, 1), > > > > + DEFINE_PROP_INT32("nr-threads", CPUState, nr_threads, 1), > > > > + DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST() > > > > +}; > > > > > > Are you aware of the current CPU hotplug discussion that is going on? > > > > I'm aware of it going on, but haven't been following it. > > > > > I'm not very involved there, but I think some of these reworks also move > > > "nr_threads" into the CPU state already, e.g. see: > > > > nr_threads (and nr_cores) are already state in CPUState. This patch just > > exposes that state via properties. > > > > > > > > https://github.com/dgibson/qemu/commit/9d07719784ecbeebea71 > > > > > > ... so you might want to check these patches first to see whether you > > > can base your rework on them? > > > > Every cpu, and thus every machine, uses CPUState for its cpus. I'm > > not sure every machine will want to use that new abstract core class > > though. If they did, then we could indeed use nr_threads from there > > instead (and remove it from CPUState), but we'd still need nr_cores > > from the abstract cpu package class (CPUState). > > Hmm. Since the CPUState object represents just a single thread, it > seems weird to me that it would have nr_threads and nr_cores > information. > > Exposing those as properties makes that much worse, because it's now > ABI, rather than internal detail we can clean up at some future time.
CPUState is supposed to be "State of one CPU core or thread", which justifies having nr_threads state, as it may be describing a core. I guess there's no justification for having nr_cores in there though. I agree adding the Core class is a good idea, assuming it will get used by all machines, and CPUState then gets changed to a Thread class. The question then, though, is do we also create a Socket class that contains nr_cores? And how will a Thread method get that information when it needs to emulate, e.g. CPUID, that requires it? It's a bit messy, so I'm open to all suggestions on it. Thanks, drew