Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 2/2] qemuBuildMemPathStr: Forbid memoryBacking/access for non-numa case

On 12/12/2017 08:36 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1448149 > > If a domain has no numa nodes, that means we don't put any > memory-backend-file onto the qemu command line. That in turn > means we can't set access='shared'. Therefore, we should produce > an error instead of ignoring the setting silently. > > Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn(a)redhat.com&gt; > --- > src/qemu/qemu_command.c | 9 +++ > tests/qemuxml2argvdata/hugepages-memaccess3.xml | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tests/qemuxml2argvtest.c | 3 + > 3 files changed, 99 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 tests/qemuxml2argvdata/hugepages-memaccess3.xml > > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_command.c b/src/qemu/qemu_command.c > index 2dd50a214..dfc17ce34 100644 > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_command.c > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_command.c > @@ -7682,6 +7682,15 @@ qemuBuildMemPathStr(virQEMUDriverConfigPtr cfg, > return -1; > } > > + if (def->mem.access != VIR_DOMAIN_MEMORY_ACCESS_DEFAULT && > + def->mem.access != VIR_DOMAIN_MEMORY_ACCESS_PRIVATE) { > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED, > + _("memory access mode '%s' not supported " > + "without guest numa node"), > + virDomainMemoryAccessTypeToString(def->mem.access)); > + return -1; > + } > + This works; however, why not move this and the virQEMUCapsGet check into a qemu_domain qemuDomainDef*Memory*Validate type function? Thus removing failure checks from qemu_command...

I suppose it's OK here, but I think better there. Still for the concept, Reviewed-by: John Ferlan <jferlan(a)redhat.com&gt;