Re: [PATCH v14 09/11] qapi/s390/cpu topology: monitor query topology information

[Pierre Morel]

On 1/12/23 13:10, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 03:53:11PM +0100, Pierre Morel wrote:
> > Reporting the current topology informations to the admin through
> > the QEMU monitor.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >   qapi/machine-target.json | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   include/monitor/hmp.h    |  1 +
> >   hw/s390x/cpu-topology.c  | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   hmp-commands-info.hx     | 16 +++++++++
> >   4 files changed, 159 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/qapi/machine-target.json b/qapi/machine-target.json
> > index 75b0aa254d..927618a78f 100644
> > --- a/qapi/machine-target.json
> > +++ b/qapi/machine-target.json
> > @@ -371,3 +371,69 @@
> >     },
> >     'if': { 'all': [ 'TARGET_S390X', 'CONFIG_KVM' ] }
> >   }
> > +
> > +##
> > +# @S390CpuTopology:
> > +#
> > +# CPU Topology information
> > +#
> > +# @drawer: the destination drawer where to move the vCPU
> > +#
> > +# @book: the destination book where to move the vCPU
> > +#
> > +# @socket: the destination socket where to move the vCPU
> > +#
> > +# @polarity: optional polarity, default is last polarity set by the guest
> > +#
> > +# @dedicated: optional, if the vCPU is dedicated to a real CPU
> > +#
> > +# @origin: offset of the first bit of the core mask
> > +#
> > +# @mask: mask of the cores sharing the same topology
> > +#
> > +# Since: 8.0
> > +##
> > +{ 'struct': 'S390CpuTopology',
> > +  'data': {
> > +      'drawer': 'int',
> > +      'book': 'int',
> > +      'socket': 'int',
> > +      'polarity': 'int',
> > +      'dedicated': 'bool',
> > +      'origin': 'int',
> > +      'mask': 'str'
> > +  },
> > +  'if': { 'all': [ 'TARGET_S390X', 'CONFIG_KVM' ] }
> > +}
> > +
> > +##
> > +# @query-topology:
> > +#
> > +# Return information about CPU Topology
> > +#
> > +# Returns a @CpuTopology instance describing the CPU Toplogy
> > +# being currently used by QEMU.
> > +#
> > +# Since: 8.0
> > +#
> > +# Example:
> > +#
> > +# -> { "execute": "cpu-topology" }
> > +# <- {"return": [
> > +#     {
> > +#         "drawer": 0,
> > +#         "book": 0,
> > +#         "socket": 0,
> > +#         "polarity": 0,
> > +#         "dedicated": true,
> > +#         "origin": 0,
> > +#         "mask": 0xc000000000000000,
> > +#     },
> > +#    ]
> > +#   }
> > +#
> > +##
> > +{ 'command': 'query-topology',
> > +  'returns': ['S390CpuTopology'],
> > +  'if': { 'all': [ 'TARGET_S390X', 'CONFIG_KVM' ] }
> > +}
>
> IIUC, you're using @mask as a way to compress the array returned
> from query-topology, so that it doesn't have any repeated elements
> with the same data. I guess I can understand that desire when the
> core count can get very large, this can have a large saving.
>
> The downside of using @mask, is that now you require the caller
> to parse the string to turn it into a bitmask and expand the
> data. Generally this is considered a bit of an anti-pattern in
> QAPI design - we don't want callers to have to further parse
> the data to extract information, we want to directly consumable
> from the parsed JSON doc.

Not exactly, the mask is computed by the firmware to provide it to the 
guest and is already available when querying the topology.
But I understand that for the QAPI user the mask is not the right 
solution, standard coma separated values like (1,3,5,7-11) would be much 
easier to read.

> We already have 'query-cpus-fast' wich returns one entry for
> each CPU. In fact why do we need to add query-topology at all.
> Can't we just add book-id / drawer-id / polarity / dedicated
> to the query-cpus-fast result ?

Yes we can, I think we should, however when there are a lot of CPU it 
will be complicated to find the CPU sharing the same socket and the same 
attributes.
I think having both would be interesting.

What do you think?

regards,
Pierre

> With regards,
> Daniel

--
Pierre Morel
IBM Lab Boeblingen