Commit Graph

6 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Daniel P. Berrangé
8851d87556 qemu: use on|off instead of yes|no for -object boolean properties
QEMU has long accepted many different values for boolean properties, but
set accepted has been different depending on which QEMU parser you hit.

The on|off values were supported by all QEMU parsers. The yes|no, y|n,
true|false values were only partially supported:

  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-11/msg01012.html

Thus we should standardize on on|off everywhere since that is most
widely supported in QEMU.

Reviewed-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
2021-02-16 14:03:13 +00:00
Daniel P. Berrangé
43c9c0859f qemu: use long on|off syntax for -chardev boolean option values
The preferred syntax for boolean options is to set the value "on" or
"off". QEMU 7.1.0 will deprecate the short format we currently use.

The long format has been supported with -chardev since at least 1.5.3,
so we don't need to check for it.

Reviewed-by: Ján Tomko <jtomko@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
2021-02-16 12:38:20 +00:00
Michal Privoznik
0c8ab47847 qemu: Don't generate '-machine memory-backend' and '-numa memdev'
In 88957116c9 I've switched to -machine memory-backend=ID and
-object memory-backend-* because QEMU is obsoleting -mem-path
and -mem-prealloc. However, what I did not foresee was that using
-machine memory-backend in combination with -numa is not allowed
in QEMU. This was reported upstream and fortunately not released
yet.

The problem is that if domain has NUMA nodes then we will
generate memory-backend-* objects for NUMA nodes (because if QEMU
is new enough to expose default RAM ID it also supports -numa
memdev=) and adding non-NUMA memory backend is wrong.

Reported-by: Masayoshi Mizuma <msys.mizuma@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>
2020-10-08 12:55:10 +02:00
Michal Privoznik
88957116c9 qemu: Use memory-backend-* for regular guest memory
So far, Libvirt configures memory-backend-* for memory hotplug,
possibly NUMA nodes and in a few other cases. This patch
switches to constructing the memory-backend-* command line for
all cases. To keep ability to migrate guests a little hack is
used: the ID of the object is set to the one that QEMU uses
internally anyways. These IDs are stable (first started to appear
somewhere around v0.13.0-rc0~96) and can't change.

In fact, this patch does exactly what QEMU does internally. The
reason for moving the logic into Libvirt is that QEMU wants to
deprecate the old style of specifying memory.

So far, only x84_64 test cases are changed, because tests for
other architectures use older capabilities, which still lack the
QEMU_CAPS_MACHINE_MEMORY_BACKEND capability and they don't report
the RAM ID.

Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836043

Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>
2020-10-01 12:06:22 +02:00
Michal Privoznik
34a59fb570 qemu: Drop two layers of nesting of memoryBackingDir
Initially introduced in v3.10.0-rc1~172.

When generating a path for memory-backend-file or -mem-path, qemu
driver will use the following pattern:

  $memoryBackingDir/libvirt/qemu/$id-$shortName

where $memoryBackingDir defaults to /var/lib/libvirt/qemu/ram but
can be overridden in qemu.conf. Anyway, the "/libvirt/qemu/" part
looks redundant, because it's already contained in the default,
or creates unnecessary nesting if overridden in qemu.conf.

Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com>
2020-04-07 15:26:17 +02:00
Ján Tomko
0627150a56 qemu: build vhost-user-fs device command line
Format the 'vhost-user-fs' device on the QEMU command line.

This device provides shared file system access using the FUSE protocol
carried over virtio.
The actual file server is implemented in an external vhost-user-fs device
backend process.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1694166

Signed-off-by: Ján Tomko <jtomko@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Krempa <pkrempa@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com>
2020-03-04 12:08:50 +01:00