The function is similar to virCPUDataCheckFeature, but it works directly
on CPU definition rather than requiring it to be transformed into CPU
data first.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
The API is supposed to make sure the provided CPU definition does not
use a CPU model which is not supported by the hypervisor (if at all
possible, of course).
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Keeping nfeatures_max set to 0 while nfeatures > 0 and some features are
already stored in features array is just asking for problems once we
want to add a new feature into the array.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
The reworked API is now called virCPUUpdate and it should change the
provided CPU definition into a one which can be consumed by the QEMU
command line builder:
- host-passthrough remains unchanged
- host-model is turned into custom CPU with a model and features
copied from host
- custom CPU with minimum match is converted similarly to host-model
- optional features are updated according to host's CPU
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
x86ModelFromCPU is used to provide CPUID data for features matching
@policy. This patch allows callers to set @policy to -1 to get combined
CPUID for all CPU features (including those implicitly provided a CPU
model) specified in CPU def.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
The ARM CPU driver wrongly reported host CPU model as "host", which made
host-model to be just an alias for host-passthrough. Let's drop this
insanity.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Some CPU drivers (such as arm) do not provide list of CPUs libvirt
supports and just pass any CPU model from domain XML directly to QEMU.
Such driver need to return models == NULL and success from cpuGetModels.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Our internal APIs mostly use virArch rather than strings. Switching
cpuGetModels to virArch will save us from unnecessary conversions in the
future.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
When starting a guest and copying host vendor cpuid to the guest
cpu, libvirtd would crash if the host cpu contained a NULL vendor
field. Avoid the crash by checking for a valid vendor in the host
cpu before copying the cpuid to the guest cpu.
For completeness, here is a backtrace from the crash
(gdb) bt
f0 0x00007ffff739bf33 in x86DataCpuid (cpuid=0x8, cpuid=0x8,
data=data@entry=0x7fffb800ee78) at cpu/cpu_x86.c:287
f1 virCPUx86DataAddCPUID (data=data@entry=0x7fffb800ee78, cpuid=0x8)
at cpu/cpu_x86.c:355
f2 0x00007ffff739ef47 in x86Compute (host=<optimized out>, cpu=0x7fffb8000cc0,
guest=0x7fffecca7348, message=<optimized out>) at cpu/cpu_x86.c:1580
f3 0x00007fffd2b38e53 in qemuBuildCpuModelArgStr (migrating=false,
hasHwVirt=<synthetic pointer>, qemuCaps=0x7fffb8001040, buf=0x7fffecca7360,
def=0x7fffc400ce20, driver=0x1c) at qemu/qemu_command.c:6283
f4 qemuBuildCpuCommandLine (cmd=cmd@entry=0x7fffb8002f60,
driver=driver@entry=0x7fffc80882c0, def=def@entry=0x7fffc400ce20,
qemuCaps=qemuCaps@entry=0x7fffb8001040, migrating=<optimized out>)
at qemu/qemu_command.c:6445
(gdb) f2
(gdb) p *host_model
$23 = {name = 0x7fffb800ec50 "qemu64", vendor = 0x0, signature = 0, data = {
len = 2, data = 0x7fffb800e720}}
Since the introduction of CMT features (commit v1.3.5-461-gf294b83)
starting a domain with host-model CPU on a host which supports CMT fails
because QEMU complains about unknown 'cmt' feature:
qemu-system-x86_64: CPU feature cmt not found
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1355857
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
By removing a non-migratable feature in a for loop we would fail to drop
every second non-migratable feature if the features array contained
several of them in a row.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Pretending (partial) support for something we don't understand is risky.
Reporting a failure is much better.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Some Intel processor families (e.g. the Intel Xeon processor E5 v3
family) introduced some PQos (Platform Qos) features, including CMT
(Cache Monitoring technology) and MBM (Memory Bandwidth Monitoring),
to monitor or control shared resource. This patch add them into x86
part of cpu_map.xml to be used for applications based on libvirt to
get cpu capabilities. For example, Nova in OpenStack schedules guests
based on the CPU features that the host has.
Signed-off-by: Qiaowei Ren <qiaowei.ren@intel.com>
Both ARM and AArch64 drivers are exactly the same (modulo function
names). Let's use just one driver for all ARM architectures.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Our current detection code uses just the number of CPU features which
need to be added/removed from the CPU model to fully describe the CPUID
data. The smallest number wins. But this may sometimes generate wrong
results as one can see from the fixed test cases. This patch modifies
the algorithm to prefer the CPU model with matching signature even if
this model results in a longer list of additional features.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
The CPU model was implemented in QEMU by commit f6f949e929.
The change to i7-5600U is wrong since it's a 5th generation CPU, i.e.,
Broadwell rather than Skylake, but that's just the result of our CPU
detection code (which is fixed by the following commit).
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
As a side effect this changes the order of CPU features in XMLs
generated by libvirt, but that's not a big deal since the order there is
insignificant.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
For two reasons:
- 0x00000001 is very similar to 0x80000001, but 0x01 is visually
different
- 0x01 format is consistent with CPUID manual
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
CPUID instruction normally takes its parameter from EAX, but sometimes
ECX is used as an additional parameter. This patch prepares the x86 CPU
driver code for the new 'ecx_in' CPUID parameter.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
The internal features are only used in explicit checks with
cpuHasFeature. Loading them into the CPU map is dangerous since the
features may accidentally be reported to users when decoding CPUID data.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
virCPUData and struct ppc64_model structures contained a pointer to
virCPUppc64Data, which was not very nice since the real data were
accessible by yet another level of pointers from virCPUppc64Data.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
virCPUData, virCPUx86Feature, and virCPUx86Model all contained a pointer
to virCPUx86Data, which was not very nice since the real CPUID data were
accessible by yet another pointer from virCPUx86Data. Moreover, using
virCPUx86Data directly will make static definitions of internal CPU
features a bit easier.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
CPUID instruction normally takes its parameter from EAX, but sometimes
ECX is used as an additional parameter. Let's rename 'function' to
'eax_in' in preparation for adding 'ecx_in'.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
A CPU data XML file already contains the architecture, let the parser
use it to detect which CPU driver should be used to parse the rest of
the file.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
When computing CPU data for a given guest CPU we should set CPUID vendor
bits appropriately so that we don't lose the vendor when transforming
CPU data back to XML description.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
cpu/cpu_ppc64.c: In function 'ppc64Compute':
cpu/cpu_ppc64.c:620:27: error: potential null pointer dereference [-Werror=null-dereference]
if (STRNEQ(guest_model->name, host_model->name)) {
~~~~~~~~~~~^~~
cpu/cpu_ppc64.c:620:9: note: in expansion of macro 'STRNEQ'
if (STRNEQ(guest_model->name, host_model->name)) {
^~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
All callers of cpuGetModels expect @models to be NULL-terminated. Once
both x86GetModels and ppc64GetModels were fixed to meet this
expectation, we can explicitly document it.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
The architecture specific loaders are now called with a list of all
elements of a given type (rather than a single element at a time). This
avoids the need to reallocate the arrays in CPU maps for each element.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
There's no reason for keeping the models in a linked list. Especially
when we know upfront the total number of models we are loading.
As a nice side effect, this fixes ppc64GetModels to always return a
NULL-terminated list of models.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
There's no reason for keeping the vendors in a linked list. Especially
when we know upfront the total number of models we are loading.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
There's no reason for keeping the features in a linked list. Especially
when we know upfront the total number of features we are loading.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
There's no reason for keeping the vendors in a linked list. Especially
when we know upfront the total number of models we are loading.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
There's no reason for keeping the models in a linked list. Especially
when we know upfront the total number of models we are loading.
As a nice side effect, this fixes x86GetModels to always return a
NULL-terminated list of models.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
When searching for the best CPU model for CPUID data we can easily
ignore models with non-matching vendor before spending time on CPUID
data to virCPUDef conversion.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Splitting the comparison into a separate function makes the code cleaner
and easier to update in the future.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Usage of this keyword in front of function declaration that is exported via a
header file is unnecessary, since internally, this has been the default for most
compilers for quite some time.
Signed-off-by: Erik Skultety <eskultet@redhat.com>
Commit 7068b56c introduced several hyperv features. Not all hyperv
features are supported by old enough kernels and we shouldn't allow to
start a guest if kernel doesn't support any of the hyperv feature.
There is one exception, for backward compatibility we cannot error out
if one of the RELAXED, VAPIC or SPINLOCKS isn't supported, for the same
reason we ignore invtsc, to not break restoring saved domains with older
libvirt.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Hrdina <phrdina@redhat.com>
While the check is appropriate for eg. the x86 and generic drivers,
there are some valid ppc64 guest configurations where the CPU
model is supposed to be NULL.
Moving this check from the generic code to the drivers makes it
possible to accomodate both use cases.
Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251927
Not all combinations of host CPU models and compatibility modes
are valid, so we need to make sure we don't try to do something
that QEMU will reject.
Moreover, we need to apply a different logic to guests using
host-model and host-passthrough modes when testing them for host
compatibility.
Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251927
If a guest CPU is defined using
<cpu mode='host-model'/>
the <model> sub-element will contain the compatibility mode to use.
That means we can't just copy the host CPU model on cpuUpdate(),
otherwise we'll overwrite that information and migration of such
guests will fail.
Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251927
Unlike what happens on x86, on ppc64 you can't mix and match CPU
features to obtain the guest CPU you want regardless of the host
CPU, so the concept of model fallback doesn't apply.
Make sure CPU definitions emitted by the driver, eg. as output of
the cpuBaseline() and cpuUpdate() calls, reflect this fact.
All previously recognized CPU models (POWER7_v2.1, POWER7_v2.3,
POWER7+_v2.1 and POWER8_v1.0) are internally converted to the
corrisponding generation name so that existing guests don't stop
working.
Use multiple PVRs per CPU model to reduce the number of models we
need to keep track of.
Remove specific CPU models (eg. POWER7+_v2.1): the corresponding
generic CPU model (eg. POWER7) should be used instead to ensure
the guest can be booted on any compatible host.
Get rid of all the entries that did not match any of the CPU
models supported by QEMU, like power8 and power8e.
Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250977
This will allow us to perform PVR matching more broadly, eg. consider
both POWER8 and POWER8E CPUs to be the same even though they have
different PVR values.
This ensures comparison of two CPU definitions will be consistent
regardless of the fact that it is performed using cpuCompare() or
cpuGuestData(). The x86 driver uses the same exact code.
Limitations of the POWER architecture mean that you can't run
eg. a POWER7 guest on a POWER8 host when using KVM. This applies
to all guests, not just those using VIR_CPU_MATCH_STRICT in the
CPU definition; in fact, exact and strict CPU matching are
basically the same on ppc64.
This means, of course, that hosts using different CPUs have to be
considered incompatible as well.
Change ppc64Compute(), called by cpuGuestData(), to reflect this
fact and update test cases accordingly.
Resolves: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250977
ppc64Compute(), called by cpuNodeData(), is used not only to retrieve
the driver-specific data associated to a guest CPU definition, but
also to check whether said guest CPU is compatible with the host CPU.
If the user is not interested in the CPU data, it's perfectly fine
to pass a NULL pointer instead of a return location, and the
compatibility data returned should not be affected by this. One of
the checks, specifically the one on CPU model name, was however
only performed if the return location was non-NULL.
Use briefer checks, eg. (!model) instead of (model == NULL), and
avoid initializing to NULL a pointer that would be assigned in
the first line of the function anyway.
Also remove a pointless NULL assignment.
No functional changes.
Use the ppc64Driver prefix for all functions that are used to
fill in the cpuDriverPPC64 structure, ie. those that are going
to be called by the generic CPU code.
This makes it clear which functions are exported and which are
implementation details; it also gets rid of the ambiguity that
affected the ppc64DataFree() function which, despite what the
name suggested, was not related to ppc64DataCopy() and could
not be used to release the memory allocated for a
virCPUppc64Data* instance.
No functional changes.
Only the symbols exported by the driver have been updated;
the driver implementation itself still uses the old names
internally.
No functional changes.
The driver only supports VIR_ARCH_PPC64 and VIR_ARCH_PPC64LE.
Just shuffling files around and updating the build system
accordingly. No functional changes.
Inheritance among CPU model is cool but it makes reviewing CPU model
definitions and comparing them to CPU models from QEMU rather hard and
unpleasant. Let's define all CPU models from scratch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Inheritance among CPU model is cool but it makes reviewing CPU model
definitions and comparing them to CPU models from QEMU rather hard and
unpleasant. Let's define all CPU models from scratch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Inheritance among CPU model is cool but it makes reviewing CPU model
definitions and comparing them to CPU models from QEMU rather hard and
unpleasant. Let's define all CPU models from scratch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Inheritance among CPU model is cool but it makes reviewing CPU model
definitions and comparing them to CPU models from QEMU rather hard and
unpleasant. Let's define all CPU models from scratch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Inheritance among CPU model is cool but it makes reviewing CPU model
definitions and comparing them to CPU models from QEMU rather hard and
unpleasant. Let's define all CPU models from scratch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Inheritance among CPU model is cool but it makes reviewing CPU model
definitions and comparing them to CPU models from QEMU rather hard and
unpleasant. Let's define all CPU models from scratch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Inheritance among CPU model is cool but it makes reviewing CPU model
definitions and comparing them to CPU models from QEMU rather hard and
unpleasant. Let's define all CPU models from scratch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
Inheritance among CPU model is cool but it makes reviewing CPU model
definitions and comparing them to CPU models from QEMU rather hard and
unpleasant. Let's define all CPU models from scratch.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
