qemu-arm
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] hw/arm/boot: Use NUMA node ID in memory node name


From: Andrew Jones
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hw/arm/boot: Use NUMA node ID in memory node name
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 09:13:49 +0200

On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 06:53:41PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
> Hi Drew,
> 
> On 6/3/21 2:48 PM, Gavin Shan wrote:
> > On 6/2/21 9:36 PM, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 11:09:32AM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
> > > > On 6/1/21 5:50 PM, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 03:30:04PM +0800, Gavin Shan wrote:
> > > > > > We possibly populate empty nodes where memory isn't included and 
> > > > > > might
> > > > > > be hot added at late time. The FDT memory nodes can't be created due
> > > > > > to conflicts on their names if multiple empty nodes are specified.
> > > > > > For example, the VM fails to start with the following error 
> > > > > > messages.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >     /home/gavin/sandbox/qemu.main/build/qemu-system-aarch64         
> > > > > >  \
> > > > > >     -accel kvm -machine virt,gic-version=host                       
> > > > > >  \
> > > > > >     -cpu host -smp 4,sockets=2,cores=2,threads=1 -m 
> > > > > > 1024M,maxmem=64G \
> > > > > >     -object memory-backend-ram,id=mem0,size=512M                    
> > > > > >  \
> > > > > >     -object memory-backend-ram,id=mem1,size=512M                    
> > > > > >  \
> > > > > >     -numa node,nodeid=0,cpus=0-1,memdev=mem0                        
> > > > > >  \
> > > > > >     -numa node,nodeid=1,cpus=2-3,memdev=mem1                        
> > > > > >  \
> > > > > >     -numa node,nodeid=2                                             
> > > > > >  \
> > > > > >     -numa node,nodeid=3                                             
> > > > > >  \
> > > > > >       :
> > > > > >     -device virtio-balloon-pci,id=balloon0,free-page-reporting=yes
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >     qemu-system-aarch64: FDT: Failed to create subnode 
> > > > > > /memory@80000000: \
> > > > > >                          FDT_ERR_EXISTS
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This fixes the issue by using NUMA node ID or zero in the memory 
> > > > > > node
> > > > > > name to avoid the conflicting memory node names. With this applied, 
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > VM can boot successfully with above command lines.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >    hw/arm/boot.c | 7 ++++++-
> > > > > >    1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > diff --git a/hw/arm/boot.c b/hw/arm/boot.c
> > > > > > index d7b059225e..3169bdf595 100644
> > > > > > --- a/hw/arm/boot.c
> > > > > > +++ b/hw/arm/boot.c
> > > > > > @@ -432,7 +432,12 @@ static int fdt_add_memory_node(void *fdt, 
> > > > > > uint32_t acells, hwaddr mem_base,
> > > > > >        char *nodename;
> > > > > >        int ret;
> > > > > > -    nodename = g_strdup_printf("/memory@%" PRIx64, mem_base);
> > > > > > +    if (numa_node_id >= 0) {
> > > > > > +        nodename = g_strdup_printf("/memory@%d", numa_node_id);
> > > > > > +    } else {
> > > > > > +        nodename = g_strdup("/memory@0");
> > > > > > +    }
> > > > > > +
> > > > > >        qemu_fdt_add_subnode(fdt, nodename);
> > > > > >        qemu_fdt_setprop_string(fdt, nodename, "device_type", 
> > > > > > "memory");
> > > > > >        ret = qemu_fdt_setprop_sized_cells(fdt, nodename, "reg", 
> > > > > > acells, mem_base,
> 
> [...]
> 
> > 
> > I've sent one separate mail to check with Rob Herring. Hopefully he have
> > ideas as he is maintaining linux FDT subsystem. You have been included to
> > that thread. I didn't find something meaningful to this thread after doing
> > some google search either.
> > 
> > Yes, I agree with you we need to follow the specification strictly. It seems
> > it's uncertain about the 'physical memory map' bus binding requirements.
> > 
> 
> I didn't get expected answers from device-tree experts.

What response did you get? Can you please provide a link to the discussion?

> After rethinking about it,
> I plan to fix this like this way, but please let me know if it sounds sensible
> to you.
> 
> The idea is to assign a (not overlapped) dummy base address to each memory
> node in the device-tree. The dummy is (last_valid_memory_address + NUMA ID).
> The 'length' of the 'reg' property in the device-tree nodes, corresponding
> to empty NUMA nodes, is still zero. This ensures the nodes are still invalid
> until memory is added to these nodes.
> 
> I had the temporary patch for the implementation. It works fine and VM can
> boot up successfully.

I would like to be sure that the kernel developers for NUMA, memory
hotplug, and devicetree specifications are all happy with the approach
before adding it to QEMU.

Thanks,
drew




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]