On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 09:54:27AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 01/27/2012 07:59 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > +int virHostValidateDevice(const char *hvname,
> > + const char *devname,
> > + virHostValidateLevel level,
> > + const char *hint)
> > +{
> > + virHostMsgCheck(hvname, "for device %s", devname);
> > +
> > + if (access(devname, R_OK|W_OK) < 0) {
> > + virHostMsgFail(level, hint);
>
> This could have different failures, depending on whether it is called as
> root or as an ordinary user; should we be trying to refine things if
> /dev/kvm exists with 600 permissions but the current euid can't
> read/write it?
True, but I wanted to keep life simple for now.
>
> > +int virHostValidateHasCPUFlag(const char *name)
> > +{
> > + FILE *fp = fopen("/proc/cpuinfo", "r");
> > + int ret = 0;
>
> You're using this like a bool, so maybe s/int/bool/ and s/0/false/ make
> sense.
Yes, good idea.
>
> > +
> > + if (virParseVersionString(uts.release, &thisversion, true) < 0) {
> > + virHostMsgFail(level, hint);
> > + return -1;
> > + }
> > +
> > + micro = (thisversion & 0xff);
> > + minor = ((thisversion >> 8) & 0xff);
> > + major = ((thisversion >> 16) & 0xff);
> > +
> > + if (major > ((version >> 16) & 0xff)) {
> > + virHostMsgPass();
> > + return 0;
> > + } else if (major < ((version >> 16) & 0xff)) {
> > + virHostMsgFail(level, hint);
> > + return -1;
> > + }
>
> Rather than break things down and check major/minor/micro independently,
> why not just check if thisversion >= version and get all three checks
> done at once?
Hmm, yes that does work
> > +
> > +int virHostValidateQEMU(void)
> > +{
> > + int ret = 0;
> > +
> > + if (virHostValidateHasCPUFlag("svm") ||
> > + virHostValidateHasCPUFlag("vmx")) {
> > + if (virHostValidateDevice("QEMU", "/dev/kvm",
> > + VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_FAIL,
> > + _("Check that the 'kvm-intel' or 'kvm-amd' modules are "
> > + "loaded & the BIOS has enabled virtualization")) < 0)
> > + ret = -1;
> > + }
>
> Should we have an else clause with VIR_HOST_VALIDATE_WARN that hardware
> lacks virtualization, therefore guests will run slower, when this is run
> on older cpus?
I added in an explicit message about hardware virt
> > +
> > +#if WITH_QEMU
> > + if ((!hvname || STREQ(hvname, "qemu")) &&
> > + virHostValidateQEMU() < 0)
> > + ret = EXIT_FAILURE;
> > +#endif
>
> Needs:
>
> #else
> if (STREQ(hvname, "qemu"))
> fail; this libvirt was not compiled with qemu support
>
> > +
> > +#if WITH_LXC
> > + if ((!hvname || STREQ(hvname, "lxc")) &&
> > + virHostValidateLXC() < 0)
> > + ret = EXIT_FAILURE;
> > +#endif
>
> A similar #else complaining about no lxc support.
I did this a little differently so we can catch all unsupported
hvname strings
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list