On 01/05/12 01:28, Dor Laor wrote:
> On 04/30/2012 07:30 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
>> On 04/29/2012 04:19 PM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
>>> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 07:24:52AM -0400, Andrew Cathrow wrote:
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Dan Kenigsberg"<dan...@redhat.com>
>>>>> To: "Gal Hammer"<gham...@redhat.com>
>>>>> Cc: vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 7:19:10 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [vdsm] reserve virtio-balloon device created by libvirt
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 04:00:55PM +0300, Gal Hammer wrote:
>>>>>> On 23/04/2012 12:26, Mark Wu wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>>>> I saw that an option to create balloon device was added by Gal in
>>>>>>> http://gerrit.ovirt.org/1573
>>>>>>> I have a question about it. Why don we preserve the old default
>>>>>>> behaviour? I know it's not supported by ovirt-engine now, but I
>>>>>>> can't
>>>>>>> figure out what will break if it's not disabled explicitly. So do
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>> think we can just make use of the balloon device added by libvirt?
>>>>>> We didn't change the old behavior.
>>>>>> Libvirt creates by default a memory-balloon device, so vdsm
>>>>>> defaults
>>>>>> was to disable it by adding a "none"-type device. This was done
>>>>>> because vdsm didn't include an option to add such device.
>>>>>> My patch added an option to create a memory-balloon through vdsm.
>>>>>> If
>>>>>> the user didn't request to add the device, the behavior is same as
>>>>>> before, disabling the memory-balloon.
>>>>> I feel that it would be best not to flip Vdsm's default at the
>>>>> moment,
>>>>> even though it is the opposite of libvirt's. I would consider to flip
>>>>> them only after your (Mark's) patches are in, tested, and proven
>>>>> worthwhile for the common case.
>>>>> Currently, without any management for the balloon, reserving a guest
>>>>> PCI
>>>>> device was deemed wasteful.
>>>> On the other side of the fence
>>>> - We know that we do need to do ballooning
>>>> - In the (next?) release we'll end up adding this support
>>>> - There's no harm (see next point) in adding the device now in fact
>>>> it saves a config change on upgrade.
>>> Well, there is a surprise factor, for someone running a guest generated
> surprise == another minor reason for windows guest to re-activate.
>>> in a previous version. Suddenly, after Vdsm upgrade, it would see an
>>> additional device. At the least, I would like Vdsm to have a
>>> configurable option to keep the old behavior.
> In qemu we have a compatibility level controlled by -M flag.
> VDSM should have a similar compatibility level and defaults shouldn't
> normally change in minor releases.
>> please take into consideration engine has an algorithm testing max
>> number of devices and it should be aware of newly introduced devices by
>> vdsm or it will overflow.
> It is good timing to change the algorithm too. IIRC the algorithm has
> some hard coded assumptions about qemu. Instead, it would be better to
> consult w/ qemu in run time and get the free pci slots number and any
> other limits. 

The engine uses the hard coded limitation for example when adding a disk
(using a pci slot) to a VM when the VM is down (no qemu to consult with).

> Soon qemu will support pci bridges and this will increase
> the number of pci devices and virtio-scsi will insert some other
> calculation factor.

The engine will have to adjust to that.

>>>> - While it takes up a PCI slot it's going to be very, very rare
>>>> deployments that will ever see the limit,
>>>> libvirt/virtmanager/virt-install has done this forever without seeing
>>>> push back.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> vdsm-devel mailing list
>>> vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
>>> https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
>> _______________________________________________
>> Engine-devel mailing list
>> engine-de...@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
> _______________________________________________
> Engine-devel mailing list
> engine-de...@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel

vdsm-devel mailing list

Reply via email to