On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 02:31:46PM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 09:39:26 +0000, Daniel Berrange wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 03:54:21AM -0500, Yi Wang wrote: > > > We can't clear vcpupin settings of XML once we did vcpupin > > > command, this is not convenient under some condition such > > > as migration to a host with less CPUs. > > > > > > This patch introduces clear feature, which can clear vcpuin > > > setting of XML using a 'c' option. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yi Wang <wang.yi59@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Xi Xu <xu.xi8@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > include/libvirt/libvirt-domain.h | 11 +++++++++++ > > > src/qemu/qemu_driver.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > > > > I'm not seeing a good reason for these change. There's no concept of clearing > > CPU pinning - the default is simply "pinned" to all possible CPUs, and the > > callers should already be able to request all possile CPUs with the current > > API design. > > Well, the thing is that in some cases the default is not pinned to all > pCPUs, but rather can be taken from other configuration points, e.g. > global VM pinning bitmap. Which global VM pinning bitmap are you referring to ? IIRC, when we spawned QEMU we explicitly set it to use all pCPUs, so that it doesn't inherit whatever affinity libvirtd itself has. I see we slightly tuned that to only include CPUs that are currently online (as reported in /sys/devices/system/cpu/online). Except I see it is even more complicated. We only use the online bitmap check if virHostCPUHasBitmap() returns true. We also potentially asked numad to give us default placement. So as implemented this _CLEAR flag is still potentially significantly different to what the original affinity was set to, which I think is pretty bad semantically. > As of such the current code does not allow restoring such state since > pinning to all pCPUs might be a desired legitimate configuration so I've > removed the hack that deleted the pinning for such configuration a long > time ago. This means that an explicit removal of the pinning might be a > desired behaviour of the API, since abusing of any other value to > restore the default state is not a good idea. True, but I think it rather a hack to modify this API with a flag _CLEAR that essentially means "ignore the bitmap parameter", as opposed to creating an API virDomainClearCPUAffinity(dom). Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
