Bug 1317977
Summary: | qemu-kvm-rhev supports a lot of CPU models | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | Reporter: | Andrea Bolognani <abologna> |
Component: | qemu-kvm-rhev | Assignee: | David Gibson <dgibson> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Virtualization Bugs <virt-bugs> |
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | 7.3 | CC: | abologna, chayang, hannsj_uhl, huding, jdenemar, juzhang, knoel, lvivier, mdeng, michen, mrezanin, qzhang, thuth, virt-maint, xfu, xuhan, xuma, zhengtli, zhguo |
Target Milestone: | rc | ||
Target Release: | 7.3 | ||
Hardware: | ppc64le | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | qemu-kvm-rhev-2.6.0-4.el7 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2016-11-07 21:00:25 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: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 1359843 |
Description
Andrea Bolognani
2016-03-15 16:32:05 UTC
When I look through the output of QEMU's cpu list, I can see a "e5500", a "POWER7" and a "POWER8", but nothing that matches e6500 or POWER6. Out of curiosity: What is libvirt doing when you specify one of those two CPUs? Should they be removed from libvirt, or should they rather be added to QEMU instead? (In reply to Thomas Huth from comment #2) > When I look through the output of QEMU's cpu list, I can see a "e5500", a > "POWER7" and a "POWER8", but nothing that matches e6500 or POWER6. Out of > curiosity: What is libvirt doing when you specify one of those two CPUs? > Should they be removed from libvirt, or should they rather be added to QEMU > instead? I was planning to discuss this with Jirka, so I've added him to the CC List for the bug. If you specify any of the models you mentioned for a guest, libvirt will not complain but you're going to get an error from QEMU, just as you'd expect. The problem here is that the CPU models libvirt knows about are used both for the guest and for the host, so even if QEMU doesn't know about POWER6 and can't use it for a guest we still want to keep that information around so libvirt can correctly identify a POWER6 host. Anyway, this is just an aside from downstream QEMU's point of view, which unless I'm mistaken only really needs to advertise POWER8. To keep the changes in downstream simple, I'd suggest to simply disable the embedded and 32-bit PowerPC CPUs like this: diff --git a/target-ppc/cpu-models.c b/target-ppc/cpu-models.c --- a/target-ppc/cpu-models.c +++ b/target-ppc/cpu-models.c @@ -70,6 +70,7 @@ #define POWERPC_DEF(_name, _pvr, _type, _desc) \ POWERPC_DEF_SVR(_name, _desc, _pvr, POWERPC_SVR_NONE, _type) +#if 0 /* Embedded PowerPC */ /* PowerPC 401 family */ POWERPC_DEF("401", CPU_POWERPC_401, 401, @@ -1101,6 +1102,7 @@ "PowerPC 7447A v1.2 (G4)") POWERPC_DEF("7457A_v1.2", CPU_POWERPC_74x7A_v12, 7455, "PowerPC 7457A v1.2 (G4)") +#endif /* 64 bits PowerPC */ #if defined (TARGET_PPC64) #if defined(TODO) @@ -1226,6 +1228,7 @@ /* PowerPC CPU aliases */ PowerPCCPUAlias ppc_cpu_aliases[] = { +#if 0 { "403", "403GC" }, { "405", "405D4" }, { "405CR", "405CRc" }, @@ -1381,6 +1384,7 @@ PowerPCCPUAlias ppc_cpu_aliases[] = { { "7447A", "7447A_v1.2" }, { "7457A", "7457A_v1.2" }, { "Apollo7PM", "7457A_v1.0" }, +#endif #if defined(TARGET_PPC64) { "Trident", "620" }, { "POWER3", "630" }, POWER7 and some other 64-bit CPUs are still enabled that way, but I think that does not hurt that much anymore and might even be useful for some regression testing with kvm-pr. If that sounds reasonable, let me know, then I can post this as a proper patch. (In reply to Thomas Huth from comment #4) > POWER7 and some other 64-bit CPUs are still enabled that way, but I think > that does not hurt that much anymore and might even be useful for some > regression testing with kvm-pr. If that sounds reasonable, let me know, then > I can post this as a proper patch. I'll leave coming up with a good balance between not overwhelming the user who might run that command and not disabiling some potentially useful stuff to you guys. It's mostly a cosmetic issue anyway, so it's probably only worth it as long as it doesn't cause too much extra work for the maintainers. Fix included in qemu-kvm-rhev-2.6.0-4.el7 Reproduced the issue on old version: Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): qemu-kvm-rhev:qemu-kvm-rhev-2.3.0-31.el7_2.8.ppc64le Host kernel:3.10.0-418.el7.ppc64le Steps to Reproduce: 1.run command on the host: /usr/libexec/qemu-kvm -cpu ? 2>&1 | wc -l 432 result:list 432 cpus Verified the issue on the latest build: Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): qemu-kvm-rhev:qemu-kvm-rhev-2.6.0-4.el7.ppc64le Host kernel:3.10.0-418.el7.ppc64le Steps to Verify: 1.run command on the host: /usr/libexec/qemu-kvm -cpu ? 2>&1 | wc -l 12 /usr/libexec/qemu-kvm -cpu ? PowerPC POWER7_v2.3 PVR 003f0203 PowerPC POWER7 (alias for POWER7_v2.3) PowerPC POWER7+_v2.1 PVR 004a0201 PowerPC POWER7+ (alias for POWER7+_v2.1) PowerPC POWER8E_v2.1 PVR 004b0201 PowerPC POWER8E (alias for POWER8E_v2.1) PowerPC POWER8NVL_v1.0 PVR 004c0100 PowerPC POWER8NVL (alias for POWER8NVL_v1.0) PowerPC POWER8_v2.0 PVR 004d0200 PowerPC POWER8 (alias for POWER8_v2.0) PowerPC host result:deleted other unsupported cpus so the bug seems to be fixed Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2016-2673.html |