|
From: | Tan, Jianfeng |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] exec: eliminate ram naming issue as migration |
Date: | Thu, 8 Feb 2018 09:20:45 +0800 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 |
On 2/7/2018 8:06 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
On Wed, 7 Feb 2018 07:49:58 +0000 "Tan, Jianfeng" <address@hidden> wrote:-----Original Message----- From: Paolo Bonzini [mailto:address@hidden Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 1:32 AM To: Igor Mammedov Cc: Tan, Jianfeng; address@hidden; Jason Wang; Maxime Coquelin; Michael S . Tsirkin Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] exec: eliminate ram naming issue as migration On 05/02/2018 18:15, Igor Mammedov wrote:Then we would have both ram block named pc.ram: Block Name PSize pc.ram 4 KiB /objects/pc.ram 2 MiB But I assume it's a corner case which not really happen.Yeah, you're right. :/ I hadn't thought of hotplug. It can happen indeed.perhaps we should fail object_add memory-backend-foo if it resulted in creating ramblock with duplicate idNote that it would only be duplicated with Jianfeng's patch. So I'm worried that his patch is worse than what we have now, because it may create conflicts with system RAMBlock names are not necessarily predictable. Right now, -object creates RAMBlock names that are nicely constrained within /object/.So we are trading off between the benefit it takes and the bad effect it brings. I'm wondering if the above example is the only failed case this patch leads to, i.e, only there is a ram named "pc.ram" and "/object/pc.ram" in the src VM? Please also consider the second option, that adding an alias name for RAMBlock; I'm not a big fan for that one, as it just pushes the problem to OpenStack/Libvirt.looking at provided CLI examples it's configuration issue on src and dst, one shall not mix numa and non numa variants.
Aha, that's another thing we also want to change. We now add numa at dst node, only because without -numa, we cannot set up the file-baked memory with share=on.
For example, "-m xG -mem-path xxx" can set up a file-baked memory, but the file is not share-able.
Or any other suggestions?Fix configuration, namely dst side of it (i.e. use the same -m only variant without -numa as it's on src). BTW, what are you trying to achieve adding -numa on dst?
See above reply. Thanks, Jianfeng
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |