Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 05:59:49PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 22.05.2015 16:39, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
On 22 May 2015 at 13:53, Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com> wrote:
On 22.05.2015 14:18, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 01:13:40PM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
# VIR_TEST_VERBOSE=1 VIR_TEST_DEBUG=1 ./qemuxml2argvtest 2>&1 | grep NUMA 61) QEMU XML-2-ARGV hugepages-pages ... libvirt: error : unsupported configuration: NUMA node 1 is unavailable 64) QEMU XML-2-ARGV hugepages-shared ... libvirt: error : unsupported configuration: NUMA node 1 is unavailable 331) QEMU XML-2-ARGV numatune-memnode ... libvirt: error : unsupported configuration: NUMA node 1 is unavailable 333) QEMU XML-2-ARGV numatune-memnode-no-memory ... libvirt: error : unsupported configuration: NUMA node 3 is unavailable 336) QEMU XML-2-ARGV numatune-auto-prefer ... libvirt: error : unsupported configuration: NUMA node 1 is unavailable 449) QEMU XML-2-ARGV memory-hotplug-dimm ... libvirt: error : unsupported configuration: NUMA node 1 is unavailable 450) QEMU XML-2-ARGV memory-hotplug-dimm-addr ... libvirt: error : unsupported configuration: NUMA node 1 is unavailable
So the test fails, but I don't believe I'm compiling libvirt with numad support... So I don't understand what is being asserted here.
Can you tell us more about what platform you are building on, and particularly what compiler & linker you are using
And what arguments do you pass to configure.
<snip>
So even though you are building with numactl, it seems to me like you don't have numa_bitmask_isbitset(). Can you check config.log to see if HAVE_NUMA_BITMASK_ISBITSET is defined to 1? If my guess is right, this causes us to not mock virNumaNodeIsAvailable() and therefore we run the original function which checks real host the build is ran on.
Or is this not the same as the issue with inline that was seen with clang before ?
Yeah, it looks quite similar to that one. By the way, clang doesn't do much inlining with -O0, I guess that could be similar in gcc, so it should be a quick check to see if that's a compiler problem. Roman Bogorodskiy