On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 16:01:00 +0800, Zhu Guihua wrote:
qemuBuildCPUDeviceStr being introduced is responsible for creating command line argument for '-device' for given cpu device.
Signed-off-by: Zhu Guihua <zhugh.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> --- src/qemu/qemu_command.c | 50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ src/qemu/qemu_command.h | 5 +++++ 2 files changed, 55 insertions(+)
diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_command.c b/src/qemu/qemu_command.c index 2ee3e10..824ad29 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_command.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_command.c @@ -5956,6 +5956,50 @@ static char *qemuBuildTPMDevStr(const virDomainDef *def, }
+int +qemuBuildCPUDeviceStr(char **deviceStr, + virDomainCPUDefPtr dev, + virQEMUCapsPtr qemuCaps) +{ + virBuffer buf = VIR_BUFFER_INITIALIZER; + + if (!virQEMUCapsGet(qemuCaps, QEMU_CAPS_DEVICE_QEMU64_CPU)) { + virReportError(VIR_ERR_CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED, + _("%s not supported in this QEMU binary"), dev->driver);
You blindly assume that the user passed the correct model here and not any other invalid string. As I've already said, having this converted to an enum makes things easier.
+ goto error; + } + + virBufferAsprintf(&buf, "%s,id=%s,apic-id=%d", + dev->driver, dev->info.alias, + dev->apic_id);
Having a buffer for a single virBufferAsprintf case is a bit overkill.
+ + if (virBufferCheckError(&buf) < 0) + goto error; + + *deviceStr = virBufferContentAndReset(&buf); + return 0; + + error: + virBufferFreeAndReset(&buf); + return -1; +} + +static int +qemuBuildCPUDeviceCommandLine(virCommandPtr cmd, + virDomainCPUDefPtr dev, + virQEMUCapsPtr qemuCaps) +{ + char *devstr = NULL; + + if (qemuBuildCPUDeviceStr(&devstr, dev, qemuCaps) < 0) + return -1; + + virCommandAddArgList(cmd, "-device", devstr, NULL); + VIR_FREE(devstr); + return 0; +} + + static char *qemuBuildSmbiosBiosStr(virSysinfoDefPtr def) { virBuffer buf = VIR_BUFFER_INITIALIZER; @@ -9862,6 +9906,12 @@ qemuBuildCommandLine(virConnectPtr conn, goto error; }
+ /* add cpu devices */ + for (i = 0; i < def->ncpus; i++) { + if (qemuBuildCPUDeviceCommandLine(cmd, def->cpus[i], qemuCaps) < 0) + goto error; + }
As I've asked before. The question here is whether this is equivalent with just increasing the vCPU count in the "-cpu" argument. If not it will require a bit more work for setting cgroups, numa pinning and other stuff. If they are equivalent we should use that instead and have the existing code do the magic. Peter