Hi. When calling virDomainGetMaxVcpus (http://libvirt.org/html/libvirt-libvirt.html#virDomainGetMaxVcpus) on an inactive domain, I receive this error: scala> res2.getMaxVcpus() libvirt: Domain Config error : Requested operation is not valid: domain is not running org.libvirt.LibvirtException: Requested operation is not valid: domain is not running at org.libvirt.ErrorHandler.processError(ErrorHandler.java:31) at org.libvirt.ErrorHandler.processError(ErrorHandler.java:46) at org.libvirt.Domain.getMaxVcpus(Domain.java:571) at .<init>(<console>:13) ... (this is from Java, but that doesn't matter) The docs say: > If the guest is inactive, this is basically the same as > virConnectGetMaxVcpus(). If the guest is running this will reflect > the maximum number of virtual CPUs the guest was booted with. But, apparently, all the driver implementations for virDomainGetMaxVcpus forward to <driver>DomainGetVcpusFlags(.., VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE | VIR_DOMAIN_VCPU_MAXIMUM). _______________________________,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ $ git grep --show-function 'GetVcpusFlags.*AFFECT_LIVE' src/esx/esx_driver.c=esxDomainGetMaxVcpus(virDomainPtr domain) src/esx/esx_driver.c: return esxDomainGetVcpusFlags(domain, (VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE | src/openvz/openvz_driver.c=static int openvzDomainGetMaxVcpus(virDomainPtr dom) src/openvz/openvz_driver.c: return openvzDomainGetVcpusFlags(dom, (VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE | src/qemu/qemu_driver.c=qemuDomainGetMaxVcpus(virDomainPtr dom) src/qemu/qemu_driver.c: return qemuDomainGetVcpusFlags(dom, (VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE | src/test/test_driver.c=testDomainGetMaxVcpus(virDomainPtr domain) src/test/test_driver.c: return testDomainGetVcpusFlags(domain, (VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE | src/vbox/vbox_tmpl.c=vboxDomainGetMaxVcpus(virDomainPtr dom) src/vbox/vbox_tmpl.c: return vboxDomainGetVcpusFlags(dom, (VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE | AFAICS, this was introduced with commit 50c51f13e2af04afac46e181c4ed62581545a488 Author: Eric Blake <eblake@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon Sep 27 16:37:53 2010 -0600 vcpu: make old API trivially wrap to new API Whereas the function's contract was documented earlier by commit b412cfadb502c76df095c2c4548c27abf7c4873f Author: Daniel Veillard <veillard@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu Mar 8 08:31:07 2007 +0000 To be honest, I'm not sure whether this worked as described at some time in the past _at all_. How to fix this? Change the documentation or the flag? Claudio -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list