On 07/02/2015 05:46 AM, Pavel Hrdina wrote: ...
diff --git a/tools/virsh-domain.c b/tools/virsh-domain.c index 27d62e9..334fd3a 100644 --- a/tools/virsh-domain.c +++ b/tools/virsh-domain.c @@ -6497,6 +6497,19 @@ cmdVcpuPin(vshControl *ctl, const vshCmd *cmd) goto cleanup; }
+ if (got_vcpu && vcpu >= ncpus) { + if (flags & VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE || + (flags & VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_CURRENT && virDomainIsActive(dom) == 1)) + vshError(ctl, + _("vcpu %d is out of range of live cpu count %d"), + vcpu, ncpus); + else + vshError(ctl, + _("vcpu %d is out of range of persistent cpu count %d"), + vcpu, ncpus); + goto cleanup; + } + cpumaplen = VIR_CPU_MAPLEN(maxcpu); cpumap = vshMalloc(ctl, ncpus * cpumaplen); if ((ncpus = virDomainGetVcpuPinInfo(dom, ncpus, cpumap,
This modification is much better and correspond to the error messages while setting the vcpu pinning.
I just pushed this now - it'd need a bz for a backport (ahem) since 1.2.17 was cut before the push... commit 848ab685f74afae102e265108518095942ecb293 Author: Luyao Huang <lhuang@redhat.com> Date: Mon Jun 29 10:10:15 2015 +0800 virsh: report error if vcpu number exceed the guest maxvcpu number John
Before I make that change for you - hopefully Pavel can take a look as well to be sure I haven't missed something.
With any luck we this could be addressed before the 1.2.17 release, but if not since it's been a regression since 1.2.13 and no one's noticed, then another release probably won't hurt.
Right, if we can fix it in 1.2.17, it will be better :)
Thanks a lot for your help and review.
ACK to the patch than John updated and proposed.