3:49 a.m.
We support add feature in host-passthough cpu model, but there are
some place need fix.
Luyao Huang (3):
cpu:x86: fix cannot keep cpu feature after migrate/restore
qemu: add a check for non-migratable cpu flags
docs: fix a small xml error in docs
docs/formatdomain.html.in | 2 +-
src/cpu/cpu_x86.c | 9 ++++-----
src/qemu/qemu_migration.c | 2 +-
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
--
1.8.3.1
3:49 a.m.
New subject: [libvirt] [PATCH 1/3] cpu:x86: fix cannot keep cpu feature after migrate/restore
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207095
When we set feature when cpu model is host-passthrough and start the vm,
we can see these settings in the XML, however after migrate/restore these
flags will be covered by host cpu models.
As cpu model host-passthrough can set feature by users now, so we need
check if there is a feature when do updatecpu().
Signed-off-by: Luyao Huang <lhuang(a)redhat.com>
---
src/cpu/cpu_x86.c | 9 ++++-----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/cpu/cpu_x86.c b/src/cpu/cpu_x86.c
index bf1867b..81ab2ca 100644
--- a/src/cpu/cpu_x86.c
+++ b/src/cpu/cpu_x86.c
@@ -2087,8 +2087,7 @@ x86UpdateCustom(virCPUDefPtr guest,
static int
x86UpdateHostModel(virCPUDefPtr guest,
- const virCPUDef *host,
- bool passthrough)
+ const virCPUDef *host)
{
virCPUDefPtr oldguest = NULL;
const struct x86_map *map;
@@ -2118,7 +2117,7 @@ x86UpdateHostModel(virCPUDefPtr guest,
}
}
}
- for (i = 0; !passthrough && i < oldguest->nfeatures; i++) {
+ for (i = 0; i < oldguest->nfeatures; i++) {
if (virCPUDefUpdateFeature(guest,
oldguest->features[i].name,
oldguest->features[i].policy) < 0)
@@ -2143,11 +2142,11 @@ x86Update(virCPUDefPtr guest,
case VIR_CPU_MODE_HOST_MODEL:
guest->match = VIR_CPU_MATCH_EXACT;
- return x86UpdateHostModel(guest, host, false);
+ return x86UpdateHostModel(guest, host);
case VIR_CPU_MODE_HOST_PASSTHROUGH:
guest->match = VIR_CPU_MATCH_MINIMUM;
- return x86UpdateHostModel(guest, host, true);
+ return x86UpdateHostModel(guest, host);
case VIR_CPU_MODE_LAST:
break;
--
1.8.3.1
3:49 a.m.
New subject: [libvirt] [PATCH 2/3] qemu: add a check for non-migratable cpu flags
If user set this feature in vm xml:
<cpu mode='host-passthrough'>
<feature policy='require' name='invtsc'/>
</cpu>
we won't report error when do migrate.
So remove def->cpu->mode check, because we can set feature for
host-passthrough model now.
Signed-off-by: Luyao Huang <lhuang(a)redhat.com>
---
src/qemu/qemu_migration.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_migration.c b/src/qemu/qemu_migration.c
index d34bb02..9c76e79 100644
--- a/src/qemu/qemu_migration.c
+++ b/src/qemu/qemu_migration.c
@@ -2004,7 +2004,7 @@ qemuMigrationIsAllowed(virQEMUDriverPtr driver, virDomainObjPtr vm,
return false;
}
- if (def->cpu && def->cpu->mode != VIR_CPU_MODE_HOST_PASSTHROUGH) {
+ if (def->cpu) {
for (i = 0; i < def->cpu->nfeatures; i++) {
virCPUFeatureDefPtr feature = &def->cpu->features[i];
--
1.8.3.1
3:49 a.m.
New subject: [libvirt] [PATCH 3/3] docs: fix a small xml error in docs
Signed-off-by: Luyao Huang <lhuang(a)redhat.com>
---
docs/formatdomain.html.in | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/docs/formatdomain.html.in b/docs/formatdomain.html.in
index 1b496c3..577d647 100644
--- a/docs/formatdomain.html.in
+++ b/docs/formatdomain.html.in
@@ -1019,7 +1019,7 @@
...</pre>
<pre>
- <cpu mode='host-passthrough'/>
+ <cpu mode='host-passthrough'>
<feature policy='disable' name='lahf_lm'/>
...</pre>
--
1.8.3.1
7:30 a.m.
On 03/30/2015 04:49 AM, Luyao Huang wrote:
We support add feature in host-passthough cpu model, but there are
some place need fix.
Luyao Huang (3):
cpu:x86: fix cannot keep cpu feature after migrate/restore
qemu: add a check for non-migratable cpu flags
docs: fix a small xml error in docs
docs/formatdomain.html.in | 2 +-
src/cpu/cpu_x86.c | 9 ++++-----
src/qemu/qemu_migration.c | 2 +-
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Looks like these were orphaned ;-)...
Looking through history of the changes, it seems you're essentially
undoing what Jan changed for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147584 in commit id
'f53bb1a'. I'm assuming these were missed on the initial pass, but
bumping them should grab his attention.
I think patch 3/3 is ACK-able and I'll push that separately since it's
unrelated.
Your patch 4/3 undoes commit id 'ec5f817f'.
John
9:01 a.m.
On 05/05/2015 08:30 PM, John Ferlan wrote:
On 03/30/2015 04:49 AM, Luyao Huang wrote:
> We support add feature in host-passthough cpu model, but there are
> some place need fix.
>
> Luyao Huang (3):
> cpu:x86: fix cannot keep cpu feature after migrate/restore
> qemu: add a check for non-migratable cpu flags
> docs: fix a small xml error in docs
>
> docs/formatdomain.html.in | 2 +-
> src/cpu/cpu_x86.c | 9 ++++-----
> src/qemu/qemu_migration.c | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
Looks like these were orphaned ;-)...
Thanks a lot for 'saving' my patches again and again ;-)
Looking through history of the changes, it seems you're essentially
undoing what Jan changed for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147584 in commit id
'f53bb1a'. I'm assuming these were missed on the initial pass, but
bumping them should grab his attention.
Yes, as your said i try to undoing the Jan's changes, but we support add
features line with host-passthough cpu model, some code for
host-passthrough model work not well host-passthough with features, and
there is a new problem around the vm save/restore with host-passthough
with features (you can see this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1207095).
Also as host-passthough can have the features now, I think we shouldn't
skip the cpu features check for host-passthough model.
But seems my patches will cause some regression issue, i will recheck
and retest them.
I think patch 3/3 is ACK-able and I'll push that separately since
it's
unrelated.
Yes, it is a small issue.
Your patch 4/3 undoes commit id 'ec5f817f'.
Thanks for pointing out that, i will recheck these patches and write a
new version these days.
Thanks a lot for your review.
John
Luyao
3488
days inactive
3524
days old
5 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
John Ferlan -
Luyao Huang