[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yg+23xh7DDSRHFxK@osiris>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 16:10:23 +0100
From: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Pierre Morel <pmorel@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Nico Boehr <nrb@...ux.ibm.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
borntraeger@...ibm.com, frankja@...ux.ibm.com, cohuck@...hat.com,
david@...hat.com, thuth@...hat.com, imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com,
gor@...ux.ibm.com, wintera@...ux.ibm.com, seiden@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/1] s390x: KVM: guest support for topology function
> > > + /* The real CPU backing up the vCPU moved to another socket
> > > */
> > > + if (topology_physical_package_id(vcpu->cpu) !=
> > > + topology_physical_package_id(vcpu->arch.prev_cpu))
> > > + return true;
> >
> > Why is it OK to look just at the physical package ID here? What if the
> > vcpu for example moves to a different book, which has a core with the
> > same physical package ID?
> >
>
> You are right, we should look at the drawer and book id too.
> Something like that I think:
>
> if ((topology_physical_package_id(vcpu->cpu) !=
> topology_physical_package_id(vcpu->arch.prev_cpu)) ||
> (topology_book_id(vcpu->cpu) !=
> topology_book_id(vcpu->arch.prev_cpu)) ||
> (topology_drawer_id(vcpu->cpu) !=
> topology_drawer_id(vcpu->arch.prev_cpu)))
> return true;
You only need to check if prev_cpu is present in topology_core_cpumask(cpu).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists