On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 17:40:37 -0600
Jim Fehlig <jfehlig@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10/12/2017 01:31 PM, Wim Ten Have wrote:
> > From: Wim ten Have <wim.ten.have@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > This patch generates a NUMA distance-aware libxl description from the
> > information extracted from a NUMA distance-aware libvirt XML file.
...
> > + /* pnode */
> > + p->pnode = simulate ? 0 : i;
>
> So any time the number of vnuma nodes exceeds the number of physical nodes, all
> vnuma nodes are confined to physical node 0?
Yes.
> Does xl behave this way too?
Yes.
> > +
> > + /* memory size */
> > + p->memkb = virDomainNumaGetNodeMemorySize(numa, i);
> > +
> > + /* vcpus */
> > + bitmap = virDomainNumaGetNodeCpumask(numa, i);
> > + if (bitmap == NULL) {
> > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR,
> > + _("vnuma sibling %zu missing vcpus set"), i);
> > + goto cleanup;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if ((cpu = virBitmapNextSetBit(bitmap, -1)) < 0)
> > + goto cleanup;
> > +
> > + libxl_bitmap_init(&vcpu_bitmap);
> > + if (libxl_cpu_bitmap_alloc(ctx, &vcpu_bitmap, b_info->max_vcpus)) {
> > + virReportOOMError();
> > + goto cleanup;
> > + }
> > +
> > + do {
> > + libxl_bitmap_set(&vcpu_bitmap, cpu);
> > + } while ((cpu = virBitmapNextSetBit(bitmap, cpu)) >= 0);
> > +
> > + libxl_bitmap_copy_alloc(ctx, &p->vcpus, &vcpu_bitmap);
> > + libxl_bitmap_dispose(&vcpu_bitmap);
> > +
> > + /* vdistances */
> > + if (VIR_ALLOC_N(p->distances, num_vnuma) < 0)
> > + goto cleanup;
> > + p->num_distances = num_vnuma;
> > +
> > + for (j = 0; j < num_vnuma; j++)
> > + p->distances[j] = virDomainNumaGetNodeDistance(numa, i, j);
> > + }
> > +
> > + b_info->vnuma_nodes = vnuma_nodes;
> > + b_info->num_vnuma_nodes = num_vnuma;
> > +
> > + ret = 0;
> > +
> > + cleanup:
> > + if (ret) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < num_vnuma; i++) {
> > + libxl_vnode_info *p = &vnuma_nodes[i];
> > +
> > + VIR_FREE(p->distances);
> > + }
> > + VIR_FREE(vnuma_nodes);
> > + }
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> > static int
> > libxlDiskSetDiscard(libxl_device_disk *x_disk, int discard)
> > {
> > @@ -2209,6 +2325,11 @@ libxlBuildDomainConfig(virPortAllocatorPtr graphicsports,
> > if (libxlMakeDomBuildInfo(def, ctx, caps, d_config) < 0)
> > return -1;
> >
> > +#ifdef LIBXL_HAVE_VNUMA
> > + if (libxlMakeVnumaList(def, ctx, d_config) < 0)
> > + return -1;
> > +#endif
> > +
> > if (libxlMakeDiskList(def, d_config) < 0)
> > return -1;
> >
> > diff --git a/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c b/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c
> > index 8483d6ecf..656f4a82d 100644
> > --- a/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c
> > +++ b/src/libxl/libxl_driver.c
> > @@ -2788,7 +2788,8 @@ libxlDomainDefineXMLFlags(virConnectPtr conn, const char *xml, unsigned int flag
> > virCheckFlags(VIR_DOMAIN_DEFINE_VALIDATE, NULL);
> >
> > if (flags & VIR_DOMAIN_DEFINE_VALIDATE)
> > - parse_flags |= VIR_DOMAIN_DEF_PARSE_VALIDATE_SCHEMA;
> > + parse_flags |= (VIR_DOMAIN_DEF_PARSE_VALIDATE_SCHEMA |
> > + VIR_DOMAIN_DEF_PARSE_ABI_UPDATE);
>
> Why is this change needed? In its current form, the patch doesn't touch any code
> in the domain def post parse callback.
I remove this. I added this to forcibly recompute memory size in case total_memory
held a value not matching the numa cells setting. (!= 0)
See virDomainDefPostParseMemory()
/* Attempt to infer the initial memory size from the sum NUMA memory sizes
* in case ABI updates are allowed or the <memory> element wasn't specified */
if (def->mem.total_memory == 0 ||
parseFlags & VIR_DOMAIN_DEF_PARSE_ABI_UPDATE ||
parseFlags & VIR_DOMAIN_DEF_PARSE_ABI_UPDATE_MIGRATION)
numaMemory = virDomainNumaGetMemorySize(def->numa);
Will address all other brought comments under v6.
Regards,
- Wim.
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
