On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 02:57:05PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> ---
> numa.c | 19 ++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/numa.c b/numa.c
> index 5ff1212..c7e3e0a 100644
> --- a/numa.c
> +++ b/numa.c
> @@ -309,6 +309,7 @@ static void validate_numa_cpus(void)
> void parse_numa_opts(MachineState *ms)
> {
> int i;
> + const CPUArchIdList *possible_cpus;
> MachineClass *mc = MACHINE_GET_CLASS(ms);
>
> for (i = 0; i < MAX_NODES; i++) {
> @@ -379,11 +380,6 @@ void parse_numa_opts(MachineState *ms)
>
> numa_set_mem_ranges();
>
> - for (i = 0; i < nb_numa_nodes; i++) {
> - if (!bitmap_empty(numa_info[i].node_cpu, max_cpus)) {
> - break;
> - }
> - }
> /* Historically VCPUs were assigned in round-robin order to NUMA
> * nodes. However it causes issues with guest not handling it nice
> * in case where cores/threads from a multicore CPU appear on
> @@ -391,11 +387,20 @@ void parse_numa_opts(MachineState *ms)
> * rule grouping VCPUs by socket so that VCPUs from the same socket
> * would be on the same node.
> */
> - if (!mc->cpu_index_to_instance_props) {
> + if (!mc->cpu_index_to_instance_props || !mc->possible_cpu_arch_ids) {
> error_report("default CPUs to NUMA node mapping isn't
> supported");
> exit(1);
> }
> - if (i == nb_numa_nodes) {
> +
> + possible_cpus = mc->possible_cpu_arch_ids(ms);
> + for (i = 0; i < possible_cpus->len; i++) {
> + if (possible_cpus->cpus[i].props.has_node_id) {
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + /* no CPUs are assigned to NUMA nodes */
> + if (i == possible_cpus->len) {
> for (i = 0; i < max_cpus; i++) {
> CpuInstanceProperties props;
> /* fetch default mapping from board and enable it */
> --
> 2.7.4
>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <drjo...@redhat.com>
