Bug 1254402
Summary: | libvirt should improve the way to bind cpu when specify nodeset in numatune | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | Reporter: | Luyao Huang <lhuang> |
Component: | libvirt | Assignee: | Martin Kletzander <mkletzan> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Virtualization Bugs <virt-bugs> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 7.2 | CC: | dyuan, lhuang, mkletzan, mzhan, rbalakri |
Target Milestone: | rc | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2016-07-07 13:11:26 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Luyao Huang
2015-08-18 02:38:08 UTC
What do you mean by that? Do you mwan we should run numad with only the number of CPUs and not the memory size? That could make sense, but using automatic vcpu placement with static strict memory binding doesn't make sense anyway. I don't get what the use case for this kind of configuration is. (In reply to Martin Kletzander from comment #1) > What do you mean by that? Do you mwan we should run numad with only the > number of CPUs and not the memory size? That could make sense, but using > automatic vcpu placement with static strict memory binding doesn't make > sense anyway. I don't get what the use case for this kind of configuration > is. I think no need call numad in this case, user already specify the memory bind policy, numad just give a advise about which node is good to bind, but if we bind the memory and cpu in different node, it will waste some resource, shouldn't libvirt not use the numad advise in this case ? or forbid this use case ? (In reply to Luyao Huang from comment #2) We need to call numad because the user specified vcpu placement='auto'. The users are effectively shooting themselves in the feet by doing this and we generally allow such behaviour as long as the specification is correct for us. Although we could provide a warning in the logs, so I'll add that. Patch proposed upstream: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-June/msg01537.html (In reply to Martin Kletzander from comment #4) > The users are effectively shooting themselves in the feet by doing this and > we generally allow such behaviour as long as the specification is correct > for us. Although we could provide a warning in the logs, so I'll add that. Okay, make sense, a warning is good enough. Looks like it is way too much trouble just for a warning that's seen only in the logs. Since this behaviour might be intentional (although very unlikely, mostly for testing purposes only) we shouldn't forbid it. Hence closing as NOTABUG. More info here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-July/msg00173.html |