Description of problem:
When boot up a guest in qemu cmd with the FOO_max while no the corresponding FOO(such as with bps_max while without bps), the guest could boot up and there is no error prompt, but the FOO_max takes no effect; and after the guest boot up, when set the FOO_max without FOO in qmp, it can be a success and the FOO_max also takes no effect. And there is the same problem on iops_size(while no iops).
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Host kernel: 3.10.0-229.el7.ppc64
Guest kernel: 3.10.0-229.el7.pc64/3.10.0-229.ael7b.ppc64le
Steps to Reproduce:
Please refer to case https://tcms.engineering.redhat.com/case/469227/?from_plan=15759
met this on x86_64
and C#0 using ppc, change hardware field to all
Deferring to RHEL 7.3. We have a fix upstream but this bug is not critical (blocker/exception). This is a QEMU command-line issue which libvirt users will not see.
Fixed in upstream version QEMU 2.5.
I have done some test on latest qemu-kvm-rhev version of rhel7.3, it's found the 'FOO_max without FOO' issue is fixed well, while the 'iops_size without iops' one is not. Should it be fixed in rhel7.3? If so, the bug should be reopened.
(In reply to Gu Nini from comment #7)
> I have done some test on latest qemu-kvm-rhev version of rhel7.3, it's found
> the 'FOO_max without FOO' issue is fixed well, while the 'iops_size without
> iops' one is not. Should it be fixed in rhel7.3? If so, the bug should be
Let's make iops_size a separate BZ. Upstream QEMU does not check that iops/iops_rd/iops_wr has been set if iops_size is used. A new patch will be required.
(In reply to Stefan Hajnoczi from comment #8)
> Let's make iops_size a separate BZ. Upstream QEMU does not check that
> iops/iops_rd/iops_wr has been set if iops_size is used. A new patch will be
Report bz 1342330 for the iops_size one. And verify this bug on qemu-kvm-rhev-2.6.0-4.el7.x86_64.
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.