On 07/11/2018 10:22 AM, Pavel Hrdina wrote: > Previously we were ignoring "nodeset" attribute for hugepage pages > if there was no guest NUMA topology configured in the domain XML. > Commit <fa6bdf6afa878b8d7c5ed71664ee72be8967cdc5> partially fixed > that issue but it introduced a somehow valid regression. > > In case that there is no guest NUMA topology configured and the > "nodeset" attribute is set to "0" it was accepted and was working > properly even though it was not completely valid XML. > > This patch introduces a workaround that it will ignore the nodeset="0" > only in case that there is no guest NUMA topology in order not to > hit the validation error. > > After this commit the following XML configuration is valid: > > <memoryBacking> > <hugepages> > <page size='2048' unit='KiB' nodeset='0'/> > </hugepages> > </memoryBacking> > > but this configuration remains invalid: > > <memoryBacking> > <hugepages> > <page size='2048' unit='KiB' nodeset='0'/> > <page size='1048576' unit='KiB'/> > </hugepages> > </memoryBacking> > > The issue with the second configuration is that it was originally > working, however changing the order of the <page> elements resolved > into using different page size for the guest. The code is written > in a way that it expect only one page configured and always uses only > the first page in case that there is no guest NUMA topology configured. > See qemuBuildMemPathStr() function for details. > > Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1591235 > > Signed-off-by: Pavel Hrdina <phrdina@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > src/conf/domain_conf.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++ > tests/qemuxml2argvdata/hugepages-pages10.args | 26 ++++++++++++++++ > tests/qemuxml2argvtest.c | 2 +- > .../qemuxml2xmloutdata/hugepages-pages10.xml | 30 +++++++++++++++++++ > tests/qemuxml2xmltest.c | 1 + > 5 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > create mode 100644 tests/qemuxml2argvdata/hugepages-pages10.args > create mode 100644 tests/qemuxml2xmloutdata/hugepages-pages10.xml > > diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c > index 5249f59d1a..bf5000f7a2 100644 > --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c > +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c > @@ -4085,6 +4085,31 @@ virDomainDefPostParseMemory(virDomainDefPtr def, > } > > > +static void > +virDomainDefPostParseMemtune(virDomainDefPtr def) > +{ > + size_t i; > + > + if (virDomainNumaGetNodeCount(def->numa) == 0) { > + /* If guest NUMA is not configured and any hugepage page has nodemask > + * set to "0" free and clear that nodemas, otherwise we would rise > + * an error that there is no guest NUMA node configured. */ > + for (i = 0; i < def->mem.nhugepages; i++) { > + ssize_t nextBit; > + > + if (!def->mem.hugepages[i].nodemask) > + continue; > + > + nextBit = virBitmapNextSetBit(def->mem.hugepages[i].nodemask, 0); > + if (nextBit < 0) { > + virBitmapFree(def->mem.hugepages[i].nodemask); > + def->mem.hugepages[i].nodemask = NULL; > + } > + } > + } > +} > + > + Problem is not that there is no guest NUMA node. The real problem is that there is no guest NUMA node left for the default <page/>. Consider the following example: <memoryBacking> <hugepages> <page size='2048' unit='KiB' nodeset='0-1'/> <page size='1048576' unit='KiB'/> </hugepages> </memoryBacking> <cpu mode='host-passthrough' check='none'> <topology sockets='1' cores='4' threads='2'/> <numa> <cell id='0' cpus='0-3' memory='4194304' unit='KiB'/> <cell id='1' cpus='4-7' memory='4194304' unit='KiB'/> </numa> </cpu> Do you consider this configuration valid? Michal -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
