7:53 a.m.
ARM/Aarch64 /proc/cpuinfo has no virtualization related flags.
Refactor the Qemu/KVM test a bit:
1) run the "for hardware virtualization" test only on plaforms with known
cpuinfo flags (x86, s390)
2) test for /dev/kvm also on platforms where no cpu flags are set
Finally Add a more generic error hint message for non-x86 plaforms
when /dev/kvm is missing.
Signed-off-by: Riku Voipio <riku.voipio(a)linaro.org>
---
tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c b/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c
index 56ec3c7..520c8ed 100644
--- a/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c
+++ b/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c
@@ -32,8 +32,9 @@ int virHostValidateQEMU(void)
virBitmapPtr flags;
int ret = 0;
bool hasHwVirt = false;
-
- virHostMsgCheck("QEMU", "%s", _("for hardware
virtualization"));
+ bool hasVirtFlag = false;
+ char *kvmhint = _("Check that CPU and firmware supports virtualization "
+ "and kvm module is loaded");
if (!(flags = virHostValidateGetCPUFlags()))
return -1;
@@ -41,12 +42,16 @@ int virHostValidateQEMU(void)
switch (virArchFromHost()) {
case VIR_ARCH_I686:
case VIR_ARCH_X86_64:
+ hasVirtFlag = true;
+ kvmhint =_("Check that the 'kvm-intel' or 'kvm-amd' modules
are "
+ "loaded & the BIOS has enabled virtualization");
if (virBitmapIsBitSet(flags, VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_CPU_FLAG_SVM) ||
virBitmapIsBitSet(flags, VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_CPU_FLAG_VMX))
hasHwVirt = true;
break;
case VIR_ARCH_S390:
case VIR_ARCH_S390X:
+ hasVirtFlag = true;
if (virBitmapIsBitSet(flags, VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_CPU_FLAG_SIE))
hasHwVirt = true;
break;
@@ -54,21 +59,27 @@ int virHostValidateQEMU(void)
hasHwVirt = false;
}
- if (hasHwVirt) {
- virHostMsgPass();
+ if (hasVirtFlag) {
+ virHostMsgCheck("QEMU", "%s", _("for hardware
virtualization"));
+ if (hasHwVirt)
+ virHostMsgPass();
+ else {
+ virHostMsgFail(VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_FAIL,
+ _("Only emulated CPUs are available, performance will be
significantly limited"));
+ ret = -1;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (hasHwVirt || !hasVirtFlag) {
if (virHostValidateDeviceExists("QEMU", "/dev/kvm",
VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_FAIL,
- _("Check that the 'kvm-intel' or
'kvm-amd' modules are "
- "loaded & the BIOS has enabled
virtualization")) < 0)
+ kvmhint) <0)
ret = -1;
else if (virHostValidateDeviceAccessible("QEMU", "/dev/kvm",
VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_FAIL,
_("Check /dev/kvm is world writable
or you are in "
"a group that is allowed to
access it")) < 0)
ret = -1;
- } else {
- virHostMsgFail(VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_WARN,
- _("Only emulated CPUs are available, performance will be
significantly limited"));
}
virBitmapFree(flags);
--
2.1.4
7:37 a.m.
On 3 June 2016 at 15:53, Riku Voipio <riku.voipio(a)linaro.org> wrote:
ARM/Aarch64 /proc/cpuinfo has no virtualization related flags.
Refactor the Qemu/KVM test a bit:
1) run the "for hardware virtualization" test only on plaforms with known
cpuinfo flags (x86, s390)
2) test for /dev/kvm also on platforms where no cpu flags are set
Finally Add a more generic error hint message for non-x86 plaforms
when /dev/kvm is missing.
Ping? Can some please take a look?
Signed-off-by: Riku Voipio <riku.voipio(a)linaro.org>
---
tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c b/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c
index 56ec3c7..520c8ed 100644
--- a/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c
+++ b/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c
@@ -32,8 +32,9 @@ int virHostValidateQEMU(void)
virBitmapPtr flags;
int ret = 0;
bool hasHwVirt = false;
-
- virHostMsgCheck("QEMU", "%s", _("for hardware
virtualization"));
+ bool hasVirtFlag = false;
+ char *kvmhint = _("Check that CPU and firmware supports virtualization "
+ "and kvm module is loaded");
if (!(flags = virHostValidateGetCPUFlags()))
return -1;
@@ -41,12 +42,16 @@ int virHostValidateQEMU(void)
switch (virArchFromHost()) {
case VIR_ARCH_I686:
case VIR_ARCH_X86_64:
+ hasVirtFlag = true;
+ kvmhint =_("Check that the 'kvm-intel' or 'kvm-amd' modules
are "
+ "loaded & the BIOS has enabled virtualization");
if (virBitmapIsBitSet(flags, VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_CPU_FLAG_SVM) ||
virBitmapIsBitSet(flags, VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_CPU_FLAG_VMX))
hasHwVirt = true;
break;
case VIR_ARCH_S390:
case VIR_ARCH_S390X:
+ hasVirtFlag = true;
if (virBitmapIsBitSet(flags, VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_CPU_FLAG_SIE))
hasHwVirt = true;
break;
@@ -54,21 +59,27 @@ int virHostValidateQEMU(void)
hasHwVirt = false;
}
- if (hasHwVirt) {
- virHostMsgPass();
+ if (hasVirtFlag) {
+ virHostMsgCheck("QEMU", "%s", _("for hardware
virtualization"));
+ if (hasHwVirt)
+ virHostMsgPass();
+ else {
+ virHostMsgFail(VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_FAIL,
+ _("Only emulated CPUs are available, performance will be
significantly limited"));
+ ret = -1;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (hasHwVirt || !hasVirtFlag) {
if (virHostValidateDeviceExists("QEMU", "/dev/kvm",
VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_FAIL,
- _("Check that the 'kvm-intel' or
'kvm-amd' modules are "
- "loaded & the BIOS has enabled
virtualization")) < 0)
+ kvmhint) <0)
ret = -1;
else if (virHostValidateDeviceAccessible("QEMU",
"/dev/kvm",
VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_FAIL,
_("Check /dev/kvm is world
writable or you are in "
"a group that is allowed to
access it")) < 0)
ret = -1;
- } else {
- virHostMsgFail(VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_WARN,
- _("Only emulated CPUs are available, performance will be
significantly limited"));
}
virBitmapFree(flags);
--
2.1.4
5:58 a.m.
On 03.06.2016 14:53, Riku Voipio wrote:
ARM/Aarch64 /proc/cpuinfo has no virtualization related flags.
Refactor the Qemu/KVM test a bit:
1) run the "for hardware virtualization" test only on plaforms with known
cpuinfo flags (x86, s390)
2) test for /dev/kvm also on platforms where no cpu flags are set
Finally Add a more generic error hint message for non-x86 plaforms
when /dev/kvm is missing.
Signed-off-by: Riku Voipio <riku.voipio(a)linaro.org>
---
tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c b/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c
index 56ec3c7..520c8ed 100644
--- a/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c
+++ b/tools/virt-host-validate-qemu.c
@@ -32,8 +32,9 @@ int virHostValidateQEMU(void)
virBitmapPtr flags;
int ret = 0;
bool hasHwVirt = false;
-
- virHostMsgCheck("QEMU", "%s", _("for hardware
virtualization"));
+ bool hasVirtFlag = false;
+ char *kvmhint = _("Check that CPU and firmware supports virtualization "
+ "and kvm module is loaded");
if (!(flags = virHostValidateGetCPUFlags()))
return -1;
@@ -41,12 +42,16 @@ int virHostValidateQEMU(void)
switch (virArchFromHost()) {
case VIR_ARCH_I686:
case VIR_ARCH_X86_64:
+ hasVirtFlag = true;
+ kvmhint =_("Check that the 'kvm-intel' or 'kvm-amd' modules
are "
Missing space after '='.
+ "loaded & the BIOS has enabled
virtualization");
if (virBitmapIsBitSet(flags, VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_CPU_FLAG_SVM) ||
virBitmapIsBitSet(flags, VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_CPU_FLAG_VMX))
hasHwVirt = true;
break;
case VIR_ARCH_S390:
case VIR_ARCH_S390X:
+ hasVirtFlag = true;
if (virBitmapIsBitSet(flags, VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_CPU_FLAG_SIE))
hasHwVirt = true;
break;
@@ -54,21 +59,27 @@ int virHostValidateQEMU(void)
hasHwVirt = false;
}
- if (hasHwVirt) {
- virHostMsgPass();
+ if (hasVirtFlag) {
+ virHostMsgCheck("QEMU", "%s", _("for hardware
virtualization"));
+ if (hasHwVirt)
+ virHostMsgPass();
+ else {
+ virHostMsgFail(VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_FAIL,
+ _("Only emulated CPUs are available, performance will be
significantly limited"));
+ ret = -1;
+ }
Missing curly braces for the first body.
+ }
+
+ if (hasHwVirt || !hasVirtFlag) {
if (virHostValidateDeviceExists("QEMU", "/dev/kvm",
VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_FAIL,
- _("Check that the 'kvm-intel' or
'kvm-amd' modules are "
- "loaded & the BIOS has enabled
virtualization")) < 0)
+ kvmhint) <0)
ret = -1;
else if (virHostValidateDeviceAccessible("QEMU",
"/dev/kvm",
VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_FAIL,
_("Check /dev/kvm is world
writable or you are in "
"a group that is allowed to
access it")) < 0)
ret = -1;
- } else {
- virHostMsgFail(VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_WARN,
- _("Only emulated CPUs are available, performance will be
significantly limited"));
}
virBitmapFree(flags);
Okay, so IIUC this is just so that we don't produce an error on
platforms such as arm where HW virt is not advertised in cpu flags.
Firstly, it's shame it isn't advertised there. Secondly, what can we do
other than adjust our code just like you're doing here?
Fixed the small syntax nits, ACked and pushed.
Congratulations on your first libvirt contribution!
Michal
12:20 p.m.
On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 15:53 +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
ARM/Aarch64 /proc/cpuinfo has no virtualization related flags.
Refactor the Qemu/KVM test a bit:
1) run the "for hardware virtualization" test only on plaforms with known
cpuinfo flags (x86, s390)
2) test for /dev/kvm also on platforms where no cpu flags are set
Finally Add a more generic error hint message for non-x86 plaforms
when /dev/kvm is missing.
So, this has already been merged and it's definitely an
improvement over the existing situation (thanks to both you
and Michal, by the way!), but I was wondering whether
removing the hardware check altogether is a good idea.
There is a difference between KVM not being built properly /
shipped / loaded and the host not supporting hardware
virtualization at all. We capture that difference on x86
and s390, but not on aarch64 and ppc64.
Is figuring out whether hardware virtualization support is
present just not feasible on aarch64, eg. because each
reports the information in a different way, or because the
information is not exposed to userspace at all?
--
Andrea Bolognani
Software Engineer - Virtualization Team
8:34 a.m.
On 13 June 2016 at 20:20, Andrea Bolognani <abologna(a)redhat.com> wrote:
So, this has already been merged and it's definitely an
improvement over the existing situation (thanks to both you
and Michal, by the way!), but I was wondering whether
removing the hardware check altogether is a good idea.
I wondered too, but opted in keeping the existing checks. They
might still save someones time.
There is a difference between KVM not being built properly /
shipped / loaded and the host not supporting hardware
virtualization at all. We capture that difference on x86
and s390, but not on aarch64 and ppc64.
Is figuring out whether hardware virtualization support is
present just not feasible on aarch64, eg. because each
reports the information in a different way, or because the
information is not exposed to userspace at all?
The information isn't exposed to userspace. The closest thing
we have is looking at kernel error messages when kvm is initialized.
Lack of virtualization support on arm64 is usually a firmware issue.
Riku
9:30 a.m.
On Tue, 2016-06-14 at 16:34 +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
> There is a difference between KVM not being built properly /
> shipped / loaded and the host not supporting hardware
> virtualization at all. We capture that difference on x86
> and s390, but not on aarch64 and ppc64.
>
> Is figuring out whether hardware virtualization support is
> present just not feasible on aarch64, eg. because each
> reports the information in a different way, or because the
> information is not exposed to userspace at all?
The information isn't exposed to userspace. The closest thing
we have is looking at kernel error messages when kvm is initialized.
Lack of virtualization support on arm64 is usually a firmware issue.
I see. Let's leave it as it is then.
--
Andrea Bolognani
Software Engineer - Virtualization Team
3114
days inactive
3125
days old
5 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Andrea Bolognani -
Michal Privoznik -
Riku Voipio