On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 12:15:54PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 02:53:50PM +0100, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote:
> > On 01.02.2018 21:26, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 09:15:15PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> > >> 2018-02-01 12:54-0500, Luiz Capitulino:
> > >>>
> > >>> Libvirt needs to know when a vCPU is halted. To get this information,
> > >>
> > >> I don't see why upper level management should care about that, a single
> > >> bit about halted state that can be incorrect at the time it is processed
> > >> seems of very limited use.
> > > 
> > > I don't see why, either.
> > > 
> > > I'm CCing libvir-list and the people involved in the code that
> > > added halt state to libvirt domain statistics.
> > > 
> > I'll try to explain the motivation for the "halted" state exposure and
> > why it ended int the libvirt domain stats.
> > 
> > s390 CPUs can be present in a system (e.g. after being hotplugged) but
> > be offline (disabled) in which case they are not used by the operating
> > system. In Linux disabled CPUs show a value of '0' in
> > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu<n>/online.
> > 
> > Higher level management software (on top of libvirt) can take advantage
> > of knowing whether a guest CPU is online and thus used or not.
> > Specifically it might not make sense to plug more CPUs if the guest OS
> > isn't using the CPUs at all.
> 
> Wasn't this already represented on "vcpu.<n>.state"?  Why is
> "vcpu.<n>.halted" needed?
> 
> > 
> > A disabled guest CPU is represented as halted in the QEMU object model
> > and can therefore be identified by the QMP query-cpus command.
> > 
> > The initial patch proposal to expose this via virsh vcpuinfo was not
> > considered to be desirable because there was a concern that legacy
> > management software might be confused seeing halted vcpus. Therefore the
> > state information was added to the cpu domain statistics.
> > 
> > One issue we're facing is that the semantics of "halted" are different
> > between s390 and at least x86. The question might be whether they are
> > different enough to grant a specific "disabled" indicator.
> 
> From your description, it looks like they are completely
> different.  On x86, a CPU that is online and in use can be moved
> between halted and non-halted state many times a second.
> 
> If that's the case, we can probably fix this without breaking
> existing code: explicitly documenting the semantics of
> "vcpu.<n>.halted" at virConnectGetAllDomainStats() to mean "not
> online" (i.e. the s390 semantics, not the x86 one), and making
> qemuMonitorGetCpuHalted() s390-specific.
> 
> Possibly a better long-term solution is to deprecate
> "vcpu.<n>.halted" and make "vcpu.<n>.state" work correctly on
> s390.
> 
> It would be also interesting to update QEMU QMP documentation to
> clarify the arch-specific semantics of "halted".

Any also especially clarify the awful performance implications of running
this particular query command. In general I would not expect query-xxx
monitor commands to interrupt all vcpus, so we should clearly warn about
this !

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|

--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list

Reply via email to