Hi, I've met two situations with NVDIMM support in libvirt where I'm not sure all the parties (libvirt & I) do the things correctly. The first problem is with memory alignment and size changes. In addition to the size changes applied to NVDIMMs by QEMU, libvirt also makes some NVDIMM size changes for better alignments, in qemuDomainMemoryDeviceAlignSize. This can lead to the size being rounded up, exceeding the size of the backing device and QEMU failing to start the VM for that reason (I've experienced that actually). I work with emulated NVDIMM devices, not a bare metal hardware, so one might argue that in practice the device sizes should already be aligned, but I'm not sure it must be always the case considering labels or whatever else the user decides to set up. And I still don't feel very comfortable that I have to count with two internal size adjustments (libvirt & QEMU) to the `size' value I specify, with the ultimate goal of getting the VM started and having the NVDIMM aligned properly to make (non-NVDIMM) memory hot plug working. Is the size alignment performed by libvirt, especially rounding up, completely correct for NVDIMMs? The second problem is that a VM fails to start with a backing NVDIMM in devdax mode due to SELinux preventing access to the /dev/dax* device (it doesn't happen with any other NVDIMM modes). Who should be responsible for handling the SELinux label appropriately in that case? libvirt, the system administrator, anybody else? Using <seclabel> in NVDIMM's source doesn't seem to be accepted by the domain XML schema. Thanks, Milan
