On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:48:13AM -0400, Wei Huang wrote:
Current libvirt can only handle up to 1024 thread siblings when it
reads Linux sysfs topology/thread_siblings. This isn't enough for
Linux distributions that support a large value. This patch fixes
the problem by using VIR_ALLOC()/VIR_FREE(), instead of using a
fixed-size (1024) local char array. In the meanwhile
SYSFS_THREAD_SIBLINGS_LIST_LENGTH_MAX is increased to 8192 which
should be large enough for a foreseeable future.
Signed-off-by: Wei Huang <wei(a)redhat.com>
---
src/nodeinfo.c | 10 +++++++---
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/nodeinfo.c b/src/nodeinfo.c
index 34d27a6..66dc7ef 100644
--- a/src/nodeinfo.c
+++ b/src/nodeinfo.c
@@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ freebsdNodeGetMemoryStats(virNodeMemoryStatsPtr params,
# define PROCSTAT_PATH "/proc/stat"
# define MEMINFO_PATH "/proc/meminfo"
# define SYSFS_MEMORY_SHARED_PATH "/sys/kernel/mm/ksm"
-# define SYSFS_THREAD_SIBLINGS_LIST_LENGTH_MAX 1024
+# define SYSFS_THREAD_SIBLINGS_LIST_LENGTH_MAX 8192
There is thread_siblings_list, which contains a range:
22-23
and thread_siblings file has all the bits set:
00c00000
For the second one, the 1024-byte buffer should be enough for 16368
possible siblings.
For the first one, the results depend on the topology - if the sibling
ranges are contiguous, even million CPUs should fit there.
For the worst case, when every other cpu is a sibling, the second file
is more space-efficient.
I'm OK with using the same limit for both (8k seems sufficiently large),
but I would like to know:
Which one is the file that failed to parse in your case?
I think both virNodeCountThreadSiblings and virNodeGetSiblingsList could
be rewritten to share some code and only look at one of the sysfs files.
The question is - which one?
Jan