"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 08:39:04AM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: >> Daniel Veillard <veillard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> ... >> >> All tests pass for me with that patch. Looks good. >> > >> > Same for me, +1 ! >> >> Thanks. >> Pushed with this comment: >> >> fix numa-related (and kernel-dependent) test failures >> This change is required on some kernels due to the way a change in >> the kernel's CONFIG_NR_CPUS propagates through the numa library. >> * src/qemu_conf.c (qemudCapsInitNUMA): Pass numa_all_cpus_ptr->size/8 >> as the buffer-length-in-bytes in the call to numa_node_to_cpus, since >> that's what is required on second and subseqent calls. >> * src/uml_conf.c (umlCapsInitNUMA): Likewise. > > This change has broken the compile on Fedora 9 and earlier where the > numa_all_cpus_ptr symbol does not exist. So it needs to have a test > in configure.ac added, and if not present, go with our original code > of a fixed mask size. Fortunately on Fedora 9's libnuma, they don't > have the annoying mask size checks - that's a new Fedora 10 thing Thanks for the heads-up. While normally I'd prefer an autoconf test, it might make sense to use an #if in this case. Maybe this will do it: #if LIBNUMA_API_VERSION <= 1 use old code #else use numa_all_cpus_ptr #endif > I also just noticed that its only touching the size param passed into > the numa_node_to_cpus, but not the actual size that's allocated for the > array. This is fairly harmless....until someone does a kernel build > with NR_CPUS > 4096 I'll deal with this, too. -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list