The 'm->numa_auto_assign_ram = numa_legacy_auto_assign_ram;' line
was supposed to be in pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options() (see commit
3bfe5716 "numa: equally distribute memory on nodes"), but the
merge commit adb354dd ("Merge remote-tracking branch
'mst/tags/for_upstream' into staging") moved it to the
pc_i440fx_2_10_machine_options().
Move the line back to pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options().
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
---
hw/i386/pc_piix.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c
index 11b4336..46dfd2c 100644
--- a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c
+++ b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c
@@ -441,7 +441,6 @@ static void pc_i440fx_2_10_machine_options(MachineClass *m)
pc_i440fx_machine_options(m);
m->alias = "pc";
m->is_default = 1;
- m->numa_auto_assign_ram = numa_legacy_auto_assign_ram;
}
DEFINE_I440FX_MACHINE(v2_10, "pc-i440fx-2.10", NULL,
@@ -453,6 +452,7 @@ static void pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options(MachineClass *m)
m->is_default = 0;
m->alias = NULL;
SET_MACHINE_COMPAT(m, PC_COMPAT_2_9);
+ m->numa_auto_assign_ram = numa_legacy_auto_assign_ram;
}
DEFINE_I440FX_MACHINE(v2_9, "pc-i440fx-2.9", NULL,
--
2.9.4
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 04:09:43PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > The 'm->numa_auto_assign_ram = numa_legacy_auto_assign_ram;' line > was supposed to be in pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options() (see commit > 3bfe5716 "numa: equally distribute memory on nodes"), but the > merge commit adb354dd ("Merge remote-tracking branch > 'mst/tags/for_upstream' into staging") moved it to the > pc_i440fx_2_10_machine_options(). > > Move the line back to pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options(). > > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> I just re-read the schedule wiki page and noticed 2017-08-22 is "release _or_ tag -rc4". Does this mean including this patch would slip the schedule for 1 week? In that case, I don't think this patch should block the release and cause a schedule slip. We can simply change the NUMA RAM assignment algorithm in pc-2.11 and keep the old one in pc-2.10. -- Eduardo
On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 16:15:34 -0300 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 04:09:43PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > The 'm->numa_auto_assign_ram = numa_legacy_auto_assign_ram;' line > > was supposed to be in pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options() (see commit > > 3bfe5716 "numa: equally distribute memory on nodes"), but the > > merge commit adb354dd ("Merge remote-tracking branch > > 'mst/tags/for_upstream' into staging") moved it to the > > pc_i440fx_2_10_machine_options(). > > > > Move the line back to pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> > > I just re-read the schedule wiki page and noticed 2017-08-22 is > "release _or_ tag -rc4". Does this mean including this patch > would slip the schedule for 1 week? > > In that case, I don't think this patch should block the release > and cause a schedule slip. We can simply change the NUMA RAM > assignment algorithm in pc-2.11 and keep the old one in pc-2.10. > It doesn't look like blocker tom either, at this point, I'd keep old algorithm for 2.10.
On 18 August 2017 at 20:15, Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 04:09:43PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >> The 'm->numa_auto_assign_ram = numa_legacy_auto_assign_ram;' line >> was supposed to be in pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options() (see commit >> 3bfe5716 "numa: equally distribute memory on nodes"), but the >> merge commit adb354dd ("Merge remote-tracking branch >> 'mst/tags/for_upstream' into staging") moved it to the >> pc_i440fx_2_10_machine_options(). >> >> Move the line back to pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> > > I just re-read the schedule wiki page and noticed 2017-08-22 is > "release _or_ tag -rc4". Does this mean including this patch > would slip the schedule for 1 week? Yes; we have a few patches of the "include this if we're doing an rc4 anyway" variety, but currently nothing that would mean we need to do an rc4. > In that case, I don't think this patch should block the release > and cause a schedule slip. We can simply change the NUMA RAM > assignment algorithm in pc-2.11 and keep the old one in pc-2.10. OK. thanks -- PMM
On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 16:09:43 -0300 Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> wrote: > The 'm->numa_auto_assign_ram = numa_legacy_auto_assign_ram;' line > was supposed to be in pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options() (see commit > 3bfe5716 "numa: equally distribute memory on nodes"), but the > merge commit adb354dd ("Merge remote-tracking branch > 'mst/tags/for_upstream' into staging") moved it to the > pc_i440fx_2_10_machine_options(). > > Move the line back to pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options(). > > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com> Peter, Could you merge this mis-merge fix as well for rc4? > --- > hw/i386/pc_piix.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c > index 11b4336..46dfd2c 100644 > --- a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c > +++ b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c > @@ -441,7 +441,6 @@ static void pc_i440fx_2_10_machine_options(MachineClass *m) > pc_i440fx_machine_options(m); > m->alias = "pc"; > m->is_default = 1; > - m->numa_auto_assign_ram = numa_legacy_auto_assign_ram; > } > > DEFINE_I440FX_MACHINE(v2_10, "pc-i440fx-2.10", NULL, > @@ -453,6 +452,7 @@ static void pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options(MachineClass *m) > m->is_default = 0; > m->alias = NULL; > SET_MACHINE_COMPAT(m, PC_COMPAT_2_9); > + m->numa_auto_assign_ram = numa_legacy_auto_assign_ram; > } > > DEFINE_I440FX_MACHINE(v2_9, "pc-i440fx-2.9", NULL,
On 23 August 2017 at 13:47, Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 16:09:43 -0300 > Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> wrote: > >> The 'm->numa_auto_assign_ram = numa_legacy_auto_assign_ram;' line >> was supposed to be in pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options() (see commit >> 3bfe5716 "numa: equally distribute memory on nodes"), but the >> merge commit adb354dd ("Merge remote-tracking branch >> 'mst/tags/for_upstream' into staging") moved it to the >> pc_i440fx_2_10_machine_options(). >> >> Move the line back to pc_i440fx_2_9_machine_options(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> > Reviewed-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com> > > > Peter, > > Could you merge this mis-merge fix as well for rc4? Sure, applied to master. thanks -- PMM
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.