|
From: | Pierre Morel |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH v9 01/10] s390x/cpus: Make absence of multithreading clear |
Date: | Wed, 28 Sep 2022 18:16:28 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.2.1 |
On 9/28/22 15:21, Pierre Morel wrote:
On 9/27/22 11:44, Cédric Le Goater wrote:On 9/5/22 17:10, Pierre Morel wrote:On 9/5/22 13:32, Nico Boehr wrote:Quoting Pierre Morel (2022-09-02 09:55:22)S390x do not support multithreading in the guest. Do not let admin falsely specify multithreading on QEMU smp commandline. Signed-off-by: Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com> --- hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c index 70229b102b..b5ca154e2f 100644 --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c @@ -86,6 +86,9 @@ static void s390_init_cpus(MachineState *machine) MachineClass *mc = MACHINE_GET_CLASS(machine); int i; + /* Explicitely do not support threads */^ Explicitly+ assert(machine->smp.threads == 1);It might be nicer to give a better error message to the user. What do you think about something like (broken whitespace ahead): if (machine->smp.threads != 1) {if (machine->smp.threads != 1) {error_setg(&error_fatal, "More than one thread specified, but multithreading unsupported");return; }OK, I think I wanted to do this and I changed my mind, obviously, I do not recall why. I will do almost the same but after a look at error.h I will use error_report()/exit() instead of error_setg()/return as in:+ /* Explicitly do not support threads */ + if (machine->smp.threads != 1) {+ error_report("More than one thread specified, but multithreading unsupported");+ exit(1); + }or add an 'Error **errp' parameter to s390_init_cpus() and use error_setg()as initially proposed. s390x_new_cpu() would benefit from it also.OK, Thanks, Pierre
-- Pierre Morel IBM Lab Boeblingen
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |