search for: topologi

Hi all, I have been trying to find out cpu topology using libvirt. When I do 'virsh capabilites', I find this inside <topology> tag: <topology>       <cells num='1'>         <cell id='0'>           <memory unit='KiB'>3908488</memory>           <cpus num='4'>             <cpu id='0' socket_id='0'

Add a topology description to the virtio-iommu driver and enable x86 platforms. Since [v2] we have made some progress on adding ACPI support for virtio-iommu, which is the preferred boot method on x86. It will be a new vendor-agnostic table describing para-virtual topologies in a minimal format. However some platforms don't use either ACPI or DT for booting (for example microvm), and will need the alternative topology description method proposed here. In addition, since the process to get a new ACPI table will take a long time, this provides a boot method even to...

Add a topology description to the virtio-iommu driver and enable x86 platforms. Since [v2] we have made some progress on adding ACPI support for virtio-iommu, which is the preferred boot method on x86. It will be a new vendor-agnostic table describing para-virtual topologies in a minimal format. However some platforms don't use either ACPI or DT for booting (for example microvm), and will need the alternative topology description method proposed here. In addition, since the process to get a new ACPI table will take a long time, this provides a boot method even to...

The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many times over the years without anyone actually going over the code and seeing if things could be simplified. To the best of my understanding, the current scheme works like this: drm_dp_mst_port and drm_dp_mst_branch both have a single refcount. When

The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many times over the years without anyone actually going over the code and seeing if things could be simplified. To the best of my understanding, the current scheme works like this: drm_dp_mst_port and drm_dp_mst_branch both have a single refcount. When

...te: > Add a topology description to the virtio-iommu driver and enable x86 > platforms. > > Since [v2] we have made some progress on adding ACPI support for > virtio-iommu, which is the preferred boot method on x86. It will be a > new vendor-agnostic table describing para-virtual topologies in a > minimal format. However some platforms don't use either ACPI or DT for > booting (for example microvm), and will need the alternative topology > description method proposed here. In addition, since the process to get > a new ACPI table will take a long time, this provides a...

...te: > Add a topology description to the virtio-iommu driver and enable x86 > platforms. > > Since [v2] we have made some progress on adding ACPI support for > virtio-iommu, which is the preferred boot method on x86. It will be a > new vendor-agnostic table describing para-virtual topologies in a > minimal format. However some platforms don't use either ACPI or DT for > booting (for example microvm), and will need the alternative topology > description method proposed here. In addition, since the process to get > a new ACPI table will take a long time, this provides a...

Test libvirt-users-request@redhat.com schrieb: >Send libvirt-users mailing list submissions to > libvirt-users@redhat.com > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvirt-users >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > libvirt-users-request@redhat.com > >You can reach the

Hi. I have following errors in my log file: Mar 22 05:33:11 xentest libvirtd: 05:33:11.518: error : failed Xen syscall topology cpuset syntax error Mar 22 05:33:21 xentest libvirtd: 05:33:21.418: error : failed Xen syscall topology cpuset syntax error Mar 22 05:33:41 xentest libvirtd: 05:33:41.274: error : failed Xen syscall topology cpuset syntax error Mar 22 05:33:41 xentest libvirtd:

On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 08:25:32PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really > confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many > times over the years without anyone actually going over the code and > seeing if things could be simplified. > > To the best of my understanding, the current scheme

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 04:27:58PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 10:29 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 08:25:32PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > > The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really > > > confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many > > > times over the

On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 10:29 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 08:25:32PM -0500, Lyude Paul wrote: > > The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really > > confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many > > times over the years without anyone actually going over the code and > > seeing if things

The current way of handling refcounting in the DP MST helpers is really confusing and probably just plain wrong because it's been hacked up many times over the years without anyone actually going over the code and seeing if things could be simplified. To the best of my understanding, the current scheme works like this: drm_dp_mst_port and drm_dp_mst_branch both have a single refcount. When

...escription to the virtio-iommu driver and enable x86 > > platforms. > > > > Since [v2] we have made some progress on adding ACPI support for > > virtio-iommu, which is the preferred boot method on x86. It will be a > > new vendor-agnostic table describing para-virtual topologies in a > > minimal format. However some platforms don't use either ACPI or DT for > > booting (for example microvm), and will need the alternative topology > > description method proposed here. In addition, since the process to get > > a new ACPI table will take a long t...

...escription to the virtio-iommu driver and enable x86 > > platforms. > > > > Since [v2] we have made some progress on adding ACPI support for > > virtio-iommu, which is the preferred boot method on x86. It will be a > > new vendor-agnostic table describing para-virtual topologies in a > > minimal format. However some platforms don't use either ACPI or DT for > > booting (for example microvm), and will need the alternative topology > > description method proposed here. In addition, since the process to get > > a new ACPI table will take a long t...

Platforms without device-tree nor ACPI can provide a topology description embedded into the virtio config space. Parse it. Use PCI FIXUP to probe the config space early, because we need to discover the topology before any DMA configuration takes place, and the virtio driver may be loaded much later. Since we discover the topology description when probing the PCI hierarchy, the virtual IOMMU

Instead of storing the number of sockets, cores, and threads separately with the possibility to have each of them optional, store them together, so either we have a CPU topology or none. This slightly simplifies the handling of CPU topology. Most of the output modes/producers already considered a missing information of a topology as "1" when any of the other was specified, so the

Hi Jean, On 8/21/20 3:15 PM, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote: > Platforms without device-tree nor ACPI can provide a topology > description embedded into the virtio config space. Parse it. > > Use PCI FIXUP to probe the config space early, because we need to > discover the topology before any DMA configuration takes place, and the > virtio driver may be loaded much later. Since we

This is the series I've been working on for a while now to get all of the atomic DRM drivers in the tree to use the atomic MST helpers, and to make the atomic MST helpers actually idempotent. Turns out it's a lot more difficult to do that without also fixing how port and branch device refcounting works so that it actually makes sense, since the current upstream implementation requires a

I try to assign 8 host cores to Windows 2003 Server Standard guest. Because this OS version has a limit of 4 sockets, I have to change the CPU topology. My guest definition: <vcpu>8</vcpu> <cpu match='minimum'> <model>core2duo</model> <topology sockets='4' cores='1' threads='2'/> </cpu> doesn't