On 12.09.2017 15:09, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 17:21:43 +0200
> David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Adapt to the new term "core_id". While at it, fix the type and drop the
>> initialization to 0 (which is superfluous).
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Matthew Rosato <mjros...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> target/s390x/cpu-qom.h | 2 +-
>> target/s390x/cpu.c | 11 +++++------
>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu-qom.h b/target/s390x/cpu-qom.h
>> index 2435cd8390..2e446fab51 100644
>> --- a/target/s390x/cpu-qom.h
>> +++ b/target/s390x/cpu-qom.h
>> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ typedef struct S390CPUClass {
>> bool is_migration_safe;
>> const char *desc;
>>
>> - int64_t next_cpu_id;
>> + uint32_t next_core_id;
> is it possible to hotplug cpus in out of order in real hw?
Yes, at least under z/VM. See last two patches in this series.
--
Thanks,
David
