On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 18:32:19 +0200, Daniel Veillard <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 05:46:28PM +0530, Nikunj A. Dadhania wrote:
> > From: Nikunj A. Dadhania <[email protected]>
> >
> > Add support in the lxc driver for various memory controllable parameters
> >
> > v4:
> > + prototype change: add unsigned int flags
> >
> > v2:
> > + Use #define string constants for "hard_limit", etc
> > + fix typo: min_guarantee
> >
> > Acked-by: "Daniel P. Berrange" <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Nikunj A. Dadhania <[email protected]>
[...]
> > + if (vm == NULL) {
> > + char uuidstr[VIR_UUID_STRING_BUFLEN];
> > + virUUIDFormat(dom->uuid, uuidstr);
> > + lxcError(VIR_ERR_NO_DOMAIN,
> > + _("No domain with matching uuid '%s'"), uuidstr);
> > + goto cleanup;
> > + }
>
> Hum, the qemu driver was reporting
>
> if (vm == NULL) {
> qemuReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR,
> _("No such domain %s"), dom->uuid);
> goto cleanup;
> }
>
> the 2 should be harmonized I guess, but since the LXC reporting is better
> I left this as a TODO, seems that's a more general cleanup needed between
> drivers.
>
Let me look at this and I will provide a patch.
>
> > + for (i = 0; i < nparams; i++) {
> > + virMemoryParameterPtr param = ¶ms[i];
> > +
> > + if (STREQ(param->field, VIR_DOMAIN_MEMORY_HARD_LIMIT)) {
> > + int rc;
> > + if (param->type != VIR_DOMAIN_MEMORY_FIELD_ULLONG) {
> > + lxcError(VIR_ERR_INVALID_ARG, "%s",
> > + _("invalid type for memory hard_limit tunable,
> > expected a 'ullong'"));
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > + rc = virCgroupSetMemoryHardLimit(cgroup, params[i].value.ul);
> > + if (rc != 0) {
> > + virReportSystemError(-rc, "%s",
> > + _("unable to set memory hard_limit
> > tunable"));
> > + }
> > + } else if (STREQ(param->field, VIR_DOMAIN_MEMORY_SOFT_LIMIT)) {
> > + int rc;
> > + if (param->type != VIR_DOMAIN_MEMORY_FIELD_ULLONG) {
> > + lxcError(VIR_ERR_INVALID_ARG, "%s",
> > + _("invalid type for memory soft_limit tunable,
> > expected a 'ullong'"));
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > + rc = virCgroupSetMemorySoftLimit(cgroup, params[i].value.ul);
> > + if (rc != 0) {
> > + virReportSystemError(-rc, "%s",
> > + _("unable to set memory soft_limit
> > tunable"));
> > + }
> > + } else if (STREQ(param->field, VIR_DOMAIN_SWAP_HARD_LIMIT)) {
> > + int rc;
> > + if (param->type != VIR_DOMAIN_MEMORY_FIELD_ULLONG) {
> > + lxcError(VIR_ERR_INVALID_ARG, "%s",
> > + _("invalid type for swap_hard_limit tunable,
> > expected a 'ullong'"));
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > + rc = virCgroupSetSwapHardLimit(cgroup, params[i].value.ul);
> > + if (rc != 0) {
> > + virReportSystemError(-rc, "%s",
> > + _("unable to set swap_hard_limit
> > tunable"));
> > + }
> > + } else if (STREQ(param->field, VIR_DOMAIN_MEMORY_MIN_GUARANTEE)) {
> > + lxcError(VIR_ERR_INVALID_ARG,
> > + _("Memory tunable `%s' not implemented"),
> > param->field);
> > + } else {
> > + lxcError(VIR_ERR_INVALID_ARG,
> > + _("Parameter `%s' not supported"), param->field);
> > + }
> > + }
> > + ret = 0;
>
> Same problem of error reporting as in the QEmu driver, I moved ret = 0;
> before the loop and et ret = -1; on all errors !
>
One clarification:
Will it return error back immediately if an error occurs?
Or will it try setting all of them one by one and if anyone of them succeed,
success is returned.
> > +cleanup:
> > + if (cgroup)
> > + virCgroupFree(&cgroup);
> > + if (vm)
> > + virDomainObjUnlock(vm);
> > + lxcDriverUnlock(driver);
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
>
> After those modifications, ACK, applied to my tree,
>
Thanks
Nikunj
--
libvir-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
