On 12/17/12 09:05, Ken ICHIKAWA wrote:
I have a problem about parsing vendor_id of domain XML.
When define vendor_id attribute,
why definition of fallback attribute is needed?
I explain below for example.
(I used virsh edit.)
Current domain xml state is like below,
<domain>
<cpu>
</cpu>
</domain>
And I redefine domain xml like below,
<domain>
<cpu>
<model vendor_id='aaaabbbbcccc'>core2duo</model>
</cpu>
</domain>
Then, do dumpxml,
vendor_id is not reflected like below.
<domain>
<cpu mode='custom' match='exact'>
<model fallback='allow'>core2duo</model>
</cpu>
</domain>
I think this is not right behavior. It should be defined like
below.
<domain>
<cpu mode='custom' match='exact'>
<model fallback='allow' vendor_id='aaaabbbbcccc'>core2duo</model>
</cpu>
</domain>
And if I define fallback attribute and vendor_id attribute at the
same time, or define vendor_id attribute after fallback attribute
is defined, vendor_id attribute is reflected normally.
Is it a bug? or is there some reason?
I read past mailing list's thread about the patch adding vendor_id
but I could not find the reason.
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2012-June/thread.html#00917
It seems that patch v1 doesn't need definition of fallback attribute
but v2 needs it.
If it's a bug, please consider to apply this patch.
It is a bug.
This patch fixes a problem that vendor_id attribute can not be
defined when fallback attribute is not defined.
Signed-off-by: Ken ICHIKAWA <ichikawa.ken@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
src/conf/cpu_conf.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
ACK to the changes, unfortunately some of the code you touched is really
ugly so I will repost your patch along with patches that fix the code
after it's applied.
I will also simplify your commit message to describe the problem better,
please let me know if you're okay with that.
Peter
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list