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

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v2 07/33] qemu: Fix CPU model fallback in domain capabilities



On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 09:25:20 -0500, John Ferlan wrote:
> 
> 
> On 02/15/2017 11:44 AM, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> > Our documentation of the domain capabilities XML says that the fallback
> > attribute of a CPU model is used to indicate whether the CPU model was
> > detected by libvirt itself (fallback="allow") or by asking the
> > hypervisor (fallback="forbid"). We need to properly set
> > fallback="forbid" when CPU model comes from QEMU to match the
> > documentation.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar redhat com>
> > ---
> > 
> > Notes:
> >     Version 2:
> >     - no change
> > 
> >  src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c                    | 3 +++
> >  tests/domaincapsschemadata/qemu_2.8.0.s390x.xml | 2 +-
> >  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c b/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c
> > index 0be2301cb..c511248bd 100644
> > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c
> > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_capabilities.c
> > @@ -3103,6 +3103,9 @@ virQEMUCapsInitCPUModel(virQEMUCapsPtr qemuCaps,
> >      if (ARCH_IS_S390(qemuCaps->arch))
> >          ret = virQEMUCapsInitCPUModelS390(qemuCaps, cpu);
> 
> The following can "at this point in the series" only affect S390 since
> 'ret' is initialized to 1 beforehand.  So other arch's won't get this -
> is that expected?

Yes. We don't get the host CPU model from QEMU for any other arch yet
(at this point in the series).

> When patch 22 is applied X86 will get this, but it doesn't seem arm or
> ppc64 would likewise (from my quick read and less than knowledgeable
> view that assumes host-model fallback is supported for those).

Right.

Jirka


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