On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 10:59:39AM -0800, Alistair Francis wrote:
>> Allow the -smp command line option to control the number of CPUs we
>> create.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.fran...@xilinx.com>
>> ---
>>
>> hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c | 3 ++-
>> hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++----------
>> 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c b/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c
>> index e2d15a1c9d..7ec03dad42 100644
>> --- a/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c
>> +++ b/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c
>> @@ -235,7 +235,8 @@ static void xlnx_zcu102_machine_class_init(ObjectClass
>> *oc, void *data)
>> {
>> MachineClass *mc = MACHINE_CLASS(oc);
>>
>> - mc->desc = "Xilinx ZynqMP ZCU102 board";
>> + mc->desc = "Xilinx ZynqMP ZCU102 board with 4xA53s and 2xR5s based on "
>> \
>> + "the value of smp";
>> mc->init = xlnx_zcu102_init;
>> mc->block_default_type = IF_IDE;
>> mc->units_per_default_bus = 1;
>> diff --git a/hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c b/hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c
>> index d4b6560194..c707c66322 100644
>> --- a/hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c
>> +++ b/hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c
>> @@ -98,8 +98,9 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu(XlnxZynqMPState *s,
>> const char *boot_cpu,
>> {
>> Error *err = NULL;
>> int i;
>> + int num_rpus = MIN(smp_cpus - XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS,
>> XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_RPU_CPUS);
>>
>> - for (i = 0; i < XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_RPU_CPUS; i++) {
>> + for (i = 0; i < num_rpus; i++) {
>> char *name;
>>
>> object_initialize(&s->rpu_cpu[i], sizeof(s->rpu_cpu[i]),
>> @@ -132,8 +133,9 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_init(Object *obj)
>> {
>> XlnxZynqMPState *s = XLNX_ZYNQMP(obj);
>> int i;
>> + int num_apus = MIN(smp_cpus, XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS);
>>
>> - for (i = 0; i < XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS; i++) {
>> + for (i = 0; i < num_apus; i++) {
>> object_initialize(&s->apu_cpu[i], sizeof(s->apu_cpu[i]),
>> "cortex-a53-" TYPE_ARM_CPU);
>> object_property_add_child(obj, "apu-cpu[*]", OBJECT(&s->apu_cpu[i]),
>> @@ -182,6 +184,7 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error
>> **errp)
>> MemoryRegion *system_memory = get_system_memory();
>> uint8_t i;
>> uint64_t ram_size;
>> + int num_apus = MIN(smp_cpus, XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS);
>> const char *boot_cpu = s->boot_cpu ? s->boot_cpu : "apu-cpu[0]";
>> ram_addr_t ddr_low_size, ddr_high_size;
>> qemu_irq gic_spi[GIC_NUM_SPI_INTR];
>> @@ -233,10 +236,10 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev,
>> Error **errp)
>>
>> qdev_prop_set_uint32(DEVICE(&s->gic), "num-irq", GIC_NUM_SPI_INTR + 32);
>> qdev_prop_set_uint32(DEVICE(&s->gic), "revision", 2);
>> - qdev_prop_set_uint32(DEVICE(&s->gic), "num-cpu",
>> XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS);
>> + qdev_prop_set_uint32(DEVICE(&s->gic), "num-cpu", num_apus);
>>
>> /* Realize APUs before realizing the GIC. KVM requires this. */
>> - for (i = 0; i < XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS; i++) {
>> + for (i = 0; i < num_apus; i++) {
>> char *name;
>>
>> object_property_set_int(OBJECT(&s->apu_cpu[i]),
>> QEMU_PSCI_CONDUIT_SMC,
>> @@ -292,7 +295,7 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error
>> **errp)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> - for (i = 0; i < XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS; i++) {
>> + for (i = 0; i < num_apus; i++) {
>> qemu_irq irq;
>>
>> sysbus_connect_irq(SYS_BUS_DEVICE(&s->gic), i,
>> @@ -307,11 +310,14 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev,
>> Error **errp)
>> }
>>
>> if (s->has_rpu) {
>> - xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu(s, boot_cpu, &err);
>> - if (err) {
>> - error_propagate(errp, err);
>> - return;
>> - }
>> + info_report("The 'has_rpu' property is no longer required, to use
>> the "
>> + "RPUs just use -smp 6.");
>> + }
>
> Is "-global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on"
> without an explicit -smp option supposed to be a supported
> configuration?
>
> 0) On current master, we have this:
>
> $ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global
> driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on
> **
> ERROR:/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/tcg/tcg.c:538:tcg_register_thread:
> assertion failed: (n < max_cpus)
> Aborted (core dumped)
>
> 1) With your patch we have this:
>
> $ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global
> driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio
> QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information
> (qemu) qemu-system-aarch64: info: The 'has_rpu' property is no longer
> required, to use the RPUs just use -smp 6.
> (qemu) info cpus
> * CPU #0: thread_id=1662
> (qemu)
>
> 2) With your patch plus Emilio's original min_cpus/default_cpus
> proposal[1], we have this:
>
> $ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global
> driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio
> QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information
> (qemu) qemu-system-aarch64: info: The 'has_rpu' property is no longer
> required, to use the RPUs just use -smp 6.
> (qemu) info cpus
> * CPU #0: thread_id=7112
> CPU #1: (halted) thread_id=7113
> CPU #2: (halted) thread_id=7114
> CPU #3: (halted) thread_id=7115
> (qemu)
>
> 3) With Emilio's max_additional_cpus proposal[2], we have this:
>
> $ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global
> driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio
> QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information
> (qemu) info cpus
> * CPU #0: thread_id=4045
> CPU #1: (halted) thread_id=4046
> CPU #2: (halted) thread_id=4047
> CPU #3: (halted) thread_id=4048
> CPU #4: (halted) thread_id=4049
> CPU #5: (halted) thread_id=4050
> (qemu)
>
>
> Which option is preferred? I like option #2 because it's
> simpler, but I would like to confirm this is really the intended
> behavior.
After this patch (and the fix to TCG otherwise it seg faults) no one
should use the has_rpu property. It is ignored and will print a
message saying that it is ignored.
Users should only use the -smp option now. So option 2 is the way to go.
Thanks,
Alistair
>
>
> [1]
> 1509734853-3014-1-git-send-email-cota@braap.org">https://mid.mail-archive.com/1509734853-3014-1-git-send-email-cota@braap.org
> [2] https://mid.mail-archive.com/20171106215454.GB2152@flamenco
>
>
>> +
>> + xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu(s, boot_cpu, &err);
>> + if (err) {
>> + error_propagate(errp, err);
>> + return;
>> }
>>
>> if (!s->boot_cpu_ptr) {
>> --
>> 2.11.0
>>
>
> --
> Eduardo
