9:08 a.m.
On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 06:25:09PM +0800, Hu Tao wrote:
From: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong(a)cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong(a)cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo(a)redhat.com>
Tested-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost(a)redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost(a)redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini(a)redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Hu Tao <hutao(a)cn.fujitsu.com>
So, this is when the ability to use multiple "cpus" ranges on -numa is
finally enabled, right?
Is there some capability probing mechanism that can be used by
management to detect the new feature?
--
Eduardo
9:23 a.m.
New subject: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 04/29] NUMA: convert -numa option to use OptsVisitor
On 06/16/2014 08:16 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 16/06/2014 16:08, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> Is there some capability probing mechanism that can be used by
> management to detect the new feature?
No, there isn't.
Not even query-command-line-options?
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
9:32 a.m.
New subject: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 04/29] NUMA: convert -numa option to use OptsVisitor
Il 16/06/2014 16:23, Eric Blake ha scritto:
On 06/16/2014 08:16 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 16/06/2014 16:08, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
>> Is there some capability probing mechanism that can be used by
>> management to detect the new feature?
>
> No, there isn't.
Not even query-command-line-options?
No, this is a (backwards-compatible) extension to how the option is parsed.
I suppose with QAPI introspection you could check if the QAPI type for
-numa is defined...
Paolo
10:39 a.m.
New subject: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 04/29] NUMA: convert -numa option to use OptsVisitor
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 04:32:09PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 16/06/2014 16:23, Eric Blake ha scritto:
>On 06/16/2014 08:16 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>Il 16/06/2014 16:08, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
>>>Is there some capability probing mechanism that can be used by
>>>management to detect the new feature?
>>
>>No, there isn't.
>
>Not even query-command-line-options?
No, this is a (backwards-compatible) extension to how the option is parsed.
But numa started appearing on query-command-line-options only after this
patch got applied. It is not the semantics I would expect from
query-command-line-options, but it is a hint that we have a QEMU version
with the new numa option handling code.
I suppose with QAPI introspection you could check if the QAPI type for -numa
is defined...
Does this exist, or is it just an idea?
--
Eduardo
10:46 a.m.
New subject: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 04/29] NUMA: convert -numa option to use OptsVisitor
Il 16/06/2014 17:39, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> No, this is a (backwards-compatible) extension to how the option
is parsed.
But numa started appearing on query-command-line-options only after this
patch got applied. It is not the semantics I would expect from
query-command-line-options, but it is a hint that we have a QEMU version
with the new numa option handling code.
Oh, then indeed it's possible. I had forgotten that -numa was using ad
hoc parsing code, not QemuOpts.
> > I suppose with QAPI introspection you could check if the
QAPI type for -numa
> > is defined...
Does this exist, or is it just an idea?
Amos was working on it.
Paolo
11:05 a.m.
New subject: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 04/29] NUMA: convert -numa option to use OptsVisitor
On 06/16/2014 09:46 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 16/06/2014 17:39, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> > No, this is a (backwards-compatible) extension to how the option is
> parsed.
>
> But numa started appearing on query-command-line-options only after this
> patch got applied. It is not the semantics I would expect from
> query-command-line-options, but it is a hint that we have a QEMU version
> with the new numa option handling code.
Oh, then indeed it's possible. I had forgotten that -numa was using ad
hoc parsing code, not QemuOpts.
Then we have our witness, even without waiting for introspection :)
>> > I suppose with QAPI introspection you could check if the QAPI type
>> for -numa
>> > is defined...
> Does this exist, or is it just an idea?
Amos was working on it.
Although given that soft freeze is tomorrow, it looks very unlikely that
we'll have it in 2.1.
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
3812
days inactive
3812
days old
6 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Eduardo Habkost -
Eric Blake -
Paolo Bonzini