Re: exposing host-passthrough in virt-manager ui?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2/6/19 11:34 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 11:22:01AM -0500, Cole Robinson wrote:
On 2/6/19 10:57 AM, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 10:20:38AM -0500, Cole Robinson wrote:
On 2/5/19 6:19 PM, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
Is it possible to add in the virt-manager the "host-passthrough" to the
CPU models please?


You can type 'host-passthrough' into the field and it will work. The reason
we don't advertise it is because it's considered to have some mild
supportability issues with libvirt. For the vast majority of use cases
though it's completely fine

Maybe we can reconsider this decision, the only thing that would not
work is live migration to destination with different CPU and we can
have a warning/info about it in the UI.

Possibly we could allow to set 'host-passthrough' as the default guest
CPU in virt-manager config.


Nowadays with host-model being much smarter, is there much functional
difference between host-model and host-passthrough? I don't really know the
answer.

Most workstation/desktop users of virt-manager probably doesn't care
about live migration and it would copy the host CPU as closely as
possible.  Since we allow to manually type in 'host-passthrough' I
personally don't see any reason why it cannot be selectable.


The problem I see is that host-passthrough sets the libvirt 'taint' flag on
the VM. While it doesn't have any real impact on end users generally I took
that to mean 'you are doing something that is unsupported'.

We should probably remove that, or at least only taint /after/ a live
migration.


Okay, interesting. I filed an upstream libvirt bug to track that:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1673098

I was under the impression migration is rejected for cpu mode=host-passthrough but that doesn't seem to be the case. Is the issue that since libvirt doesn't know the full CPU config, we can't validate the remote host supports the CPU, so migration could appear to succeed but then the guest will malfunction on the new host?

Thanks,
Cole

_______________________________________________
virt-tools-list mailing list
virt-tools-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virt-tools-list




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Virtualization]     [KVM Development]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]

  Powered by Linux