Skip to content

Q
qemu

openeuler / qemu

通知 10
Star 0
Fork 0
Q
qemu

体验新版 GitCode，发现更多精彩内容 >>

切换分支/标签
  1. 13 1月, 2016 1 次提交
    • M
      Use error_fatal to simplify obvious fatal errors · 007b0657
      由 Markus Armbruster 提交于 
      Done with this Coccinelle semantic patch:

    @@
    type T;
    identifier FUN, RET;
    expression list ARGS;
    expression ERR, EC;
    @@
    (
    -    T RET = FUN(ARGS, &ERR);
    +    T RET = FUN(ARGS, &error_fatal);
    |
    -    RET = FUN(ARGS, &ERR);
    +    RET = FUN(ARGS, &error_fatal);
    |
    -    FUN(ARGS, &ERR);
    +    FUN(ARGS, &error_fatal);
    )
    -    if (ERR != NULL) {
    -        error_report_err(ERR);
    -        exit(EC);
    -    }

This is actually a more elegant version of my initial semantic patch
by courtesy of Eduardo.

It leaves dead Error * variables behind, cleaned up manually.

Cc: qemu-arm@nongnu.org
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NMarkus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: NEduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
      007b0657
  3. 19 12月, 2015 1 次提交
  5. 02 11月, 2015 1 次提交
    • E
      memory: Convert to new qapi union layout · 1fd5d4fe
      由 Eric Blake 提交于 
      We have two issues with our qapi union layout:
1) Even though the QMP wire format spells the tag 'type', the
C code spells it 'kind', requiring some hacks in the generator.
2) The C struct uses an anonymous union, which places all tag
values in the same namespace as all non-variant members. This
leads to spurious collisions if a tag value matches a non-variant
member's name.

Make the conversion to the new layout for memory-related code.
Signed-off-by: NEric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1445898903-12082-21-git-send-email-eblake@redhat.com>
[Commit message tweaked slightly]
Signed-off-by: NMarkus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
      1fd5d4fe
  7. 18 9月, 2015 1 次提交
    • M
      Fix bad error handling after memory_region_init_ram() · f8ed85ac
      由 Markus Armbruster 提交于 
      Symptom:

    $ qemu-system-x86_64 -m 10000000
    Unexpected error in ram_block_add() at /work/armbru/qemu/exec.c:1456:
    upstream-qemu: cannot set up guest memory 'pc.ram': Cannot allocate memory
    Aborted (core dumped)

Root cause: commit ef701d7b screwed up handling of out-of-memory
conditions.  Before the commit, we report the error and exit(1), in
one place, ram_block_add().  The commit lifts the error handling up
the call chain some, to three places.  Fine.  Except it uses
&error_abort in these places, changing the behavior from exit(1) to
abort(), and thus undoing the work of commit 39228250 "exec: Don't
abort when we can't allocate guest memory".

The three places are:

* memory_region_init_ram()

  Commit 49946538 (right after commit ef701d7b) lifted the error
  handling further, through memory_region_init_ram(), multiplying the
  incorrect use of &error_abort.  Later on, imitation of existing
  (bad) code may have created more.

* memory_region_init_ram_ptr()

  The &error_abort is still there.

* memory_region_init_rom_device()

  Doesn't need fixing, because commit 33e0eb52 (soon after commit
  ef701d7b) lifted the error handling further, and in the process
  changed it from &error_abort to passing it up the call chain.
  Correct, because the callers are realize() methods.

Fix the error handling after memory_region_init_ram() with a
Coccinelle semantic patch:

    @r@
    expression mr, owner, name, size, err;
    position p;
    @@
            memory_region_init_ram(mr, owner, name, size,
    (
    -                              &error_abort
    +                              &error_fatal
    |
                                   err@p
    )
                                  );
    @script:python@
        p << r.p;
    @@
    print "%s:%s:%s" % (p[0].file, p[0].line, p[0].column)

When the last argument is &error_abort, it gets replaced by
&error_fatal.  This is the fix.

If the last argument is anything else, its position is reported.  This
lets us check the fix is complete.  Four positions get reported:

* ram_backend_memory_alloc()

  Error is passed up the call chain, ultimately through
  user_creatable_complete().  As far as I can tell, it's callers all
  handle the error sanely.

* fsl_imx25_realize(), fsl_imx31_realize(), dp8393x_realize()

  DeviceClass.realize() methods, errors handled sanely further up the
  call chain.

We're good.  Test case again behaves:

    $ qemu-system-x86_64 -m 10000000
    qemu-system-x86_64: cannot set up guest memory 'pc.ram': Cannot allocate memory
    [Exit 1 ]

The next commits will repair the rest of commit ef701d7b's damage.
Signed-off-by: NMarkus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1441983105-26376-3-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: NPeter Crosthwaite <crosthwaite.peter@gmail.com>
      f8ed85ac
  9. 11 9月, 2015 1 次提交
  11. 16 7月, 2015 1 次提交
  13. 04 7月, 2015 3 次提交
  15. 23 6月, 2015 1 次提交
  17. 20 6月, 2015 2 次提交
  19. 09 6月, 2015 2 次提交
  21. 20 3月, 2015 5 次提交
    • E
      numa: Print warning if no node is assigned to a CPU · 549fc54b
      由 Eduardo Habkost 提交于 
      We need all possible CPUs (including hotplug ones) to be present in the
SRAT when QEMU starts. QEMU already does that correctly today, the only
problem is that when a CPU is omitted from the NUMA configuration, it is
silently assigned to node 0.

Check if all CPUs up to max_cpus are present in the NUMA configuration
and warn about missing CPUs.

Make it just a warning, to allow management software to be updated if
necessary. In the future we may make it a fatal error instead.

Command-line examples:

* Correct, no warning:

  $ qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 2,maxcpus=4
  $ qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 2,maxcpus=4 -numa node,cpus=0-3

* Incomplete, with warnings:

  $ qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 2,maxcpus=4 -numa node,cpus=0
  qemu-system-x86_64: warning: CPU(s) not present in any NUMA nodes: 1 2 3
  qemu-system-x86_64: warning: All CPU(s) up to maxcpus should be described in NUMA config

  $ qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 2,maxcpus=4 -numa node,cpus=0-2
  qemu-system-x86_64: warning: CPU(s) not present in any NUMA nodes: 3
  qemu-system-x86_64: warning: All CPU(s) up to maxcpus should be described in NUMA config
Signed-off-by: NEduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
---
v1 -> v2: (no changes)

v2 -> v3:
 * Use enumerate_cpus() and error_report() for error message
 * Simplify logic using bitmap_full()

v3 -> v4:
 * Clarify error message, mention that all CPUs up to
   maxcpus need to be described in NUMA config

v4 -> v5:
 * Commit log update, to make problem description clearer
      549fc54b
    • I
      numa: introduce machine callback for VCPU to node mapping · 57924bcd
      由 Igor Mammedov 提交于 
      Current default round-robin way of distributing VCPUs among
NUMA nodes might be wrong in case on multi-core/threads
CPUs. Making guests confused wrt topology where cores from
the same socket are on different nodes.

Allow a machine to override default mapping by providing
 MachineClass::cpu_index_to_socket_id()
callback which would allow it group VCPUs from a socket
on the same NUMA node.
Signed-off-by: NIgor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: NAndreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: NEduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
      57924bcd
    • E
      numa: Reject configuration if CPU appears on multiple nodes · 3ef71975
      由 Eduardo Habkost 提交于 
      Each CPU can appear in only one NUMA node on the NUMA config. Reject
configuration if a CPU appears in multiple nodes.
Reviewed-by: NIgor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NEduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
      3ef71975
    • E
      numa: Reject CPU indexes > max_cpus · 8979c945
      由 Eduardo Habkost 提交于 
      CPU index is always less than max_cpus, as documented at sysemu.h:

> The following shall be true for all CPUs:
>   cpu->cpu_index < max_cpus <= MAX_CPUMASK_BITS

Reject configuration which uses invalid CPU indexes.
Reviewed-by: NIgor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NEduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
      8979c945
    • E
      numa: Fix off-by-one error at MAX_CPUMASK_BITS check · ed26b922
      由 Eduardo Habkost 提交于 
      Fix the CPU index check to ensure we don't go beyond the size of the
node_cpu bitmap.

CPU index is always less than MAX_CPUMASK_BITS, as documented at
sysemu.h:

> The following shall be true for all CPUs:
>   cpu->cpu_index < max_cpus <= MAX_CPUMASK_BITS
Reviewed-by: NIgor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NEduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
      ed26b922
  23. 10 3月, 2015 1 次提交
  25. 24 2月, 2015 6 次提交
  27. 18 2月, 2015 1 次提交
  29. 11 11月, 2014 1 次提交
  31. 09 9月, 2014 1 次提交
  33. 03 9月, 2014 2 次提交
  35. 14 8月, 2014 1 次提交
  37. 06 7月, 2014 1 次提交
  39. 29 6月, 2014 5 次提交
  41. 19 6月, 2014 2 次提交