Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] qemu: Allow use of hot plugged host CPUs if no affinity set

On 11/04/2016 04:01 AM, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote: > Running VMs couldn't use newly hot plugged host CPUs even if the VMs > had no CPU pinning defined AND the cpuset controller was disabled in > the libvirt qemu configuration. Add blank lines between paragraphs - just makes it easier to read. > This was because in this case the process affinity was set by libvirt > to all currently present host CPUs in order to avoid situations, where > libvirtd was deliberately running on a CPU subset and thus the spawned > VMs would be involuntarily restricted to the CPU subset inherited by > libvirtd. > That however prevents new host CPUs to be utilized when they show up. > With this change we will NOT set the VM's affinity mask if it > matches the online host CPU mask. > > There's still the chance that for some reason the deliberately chosen > libvirtd affinity matches the online host CPU mask by accident. In this > case the behavior remains as it was before (CPUs offline while setting > the affinity will not be used if they show up later on). > > Signed-off-by: Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com&gt; > Tested-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com&gt; > --- > src/qemu/qemu_process.c | 12 ++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c > index 1b67aee..76f9210 100644 > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c > @@ -2202,6 +2202,7 @@ qemuProcessInitCpuAffinity(virDomainObjPtr vm) > int ret = -1; > virBitmapPtr cpumap = NULL; > virBitmapPtr cpumapToSet = NULL; > + virBitmapPtr hostcpumap = NULL; > qemuDomainObjPrivatePtr priv = vm->privateData; > > if (!vm->pid) { > @@ -2223,6 +2224,16 @@ qemuProcessInitCpuAffinity(virDomainObjPtr vm) > * the spawned QEMU instance to all pCPUs if no map is given in > * its config file */ > int hostcpus; > + hostcpumap = virHostCPUGetOnlineBitmap(); > + cpumap = virProcessGetAffinity(vm->pid); Wouldn't this set 'cpumap' to something that shortly would be overwritten by virBitmapNew if we don't jump to cleanup in this patch?

Beyond that - I'll let someone with more detailed knowledge of SetAffinity nuances decide whether avoiding the call is proper.

> + > + if (hostcpumap && cpumap && virBitmapEqual(hostcpumap, cpumap)) { > + /* we're using all available CPUs, no reason to set > + * mask. If libvirtd is running without explicit > + * affinity, we can use hotplugged CPUs for this VM */ > + ret = 0; > + goto cleanup; > + } >

> /* setaffinity fails if you set bits for CPUs which > * aren't present, so we have to limit ourselves */ > @@ -2248,6 +2259,7 @@ qemuProcessInitCpuAffinity(virDomainObjPtr vm) > > cleanup: > virBitmapFree(cpumap); > + virBitmapFree(hostcpumap); > return ret; > } > > -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list(a)redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list