On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 03:31:48PM +0800, Hu Tao wrote:
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * virDomainBlkioWeightDeviceParseXML
> > + *
> > + * this function parses a XML node:
> > + *
> > + * <device>
> > + * <major>major</major>
> > + * <minor>minor</minor>
> > + * <weight>weight</weight>
> > + * </device>
> > + *
> > + * and fills a virBlkioWeightDevice struct.
> > + */
>
> I'm not really seeing the benefit in using major, minor in the XML for
> this. The <disk> element is using the /dev/hda1 path for the host
> device, so I'd expect the same path to be usable for the block I/O
> tuning.
>
> How does the scope work here, does major,minor have to refer to a block
> device, or can it refer to a partition ? If we have multiple <device>
> elements, each giving a different partition on the same device can we
> set different weight for each partition ?
blkio doesn't support io control on a partition, so I add major, minor
to refer to a block device as a whole, rather than utilizing the existing
<disk> element.
Hmm, well I think we should still just use the '/dev/hda' block device
path. The major/minor numbers cannot be assumed to be stable across
different hosts, so would break migration. Whereas you can use the
/dev/disk/by-{id,path} symlinks for block paths and thus be migration
safe.
Daniel
--
|:
http://berrange.com -o-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|:
http://libvirt.org -o-
http://virt-manager.org :|
|:
http://autobuild.org -o-
http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|:
http://entangle-photo.org -o-
http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|