Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 337591
[5.2]The information of weight/cap is a unusable parameter for starting a guest domain.
Last modified: 2009-12-14 16:22:58 EST
Description of problem:
I set the information of weight/cap to configuration file, and execute
"virsh start" with that file.
But the information of weight/cap is lost.
The information of weight/cap is a unusable parameter for starting a guest
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
installed from RPM (RHEL5.1 RC):
got from cvs:
libvirt: upstream(Revision of Changelog is 1.772)
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Start the guest domain with the configuration file
# cat /etc/xen/guest_dom
name = "guest_dom"
uuid = "29610f8f-e164-ea5a-a54a-2d909e8d9043"
maxmem = 1024
memory = 1024
vcpus = 4
cpu_weight = 512
cpu_cap = 300
bootloader = "/usr/bin/pygrub"
on_poweroff = "destroy"
on_reboot = "restart"
on_crash = "restart"
vnc = 1
vncunused = 0
vncdisplay = "25"
disk = [ "phy:/dev/sda5,xvda,w" ]
vif = [ "mac=02:17:42:2F:01:13,bridge=xenbr2" ]
# virsh start guest_dom
2. Confirm the information of weight/cap
# virsh schedinfo guest_dom
weight : 256
cap : 0
The information of weight/cap that described at configuration file is lost
when starting a guest domain with "virsh start".
The information of weight/cap that described at configuration file is usable
for starting a guest domain.
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red
Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has requested
further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed
products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update
This hasn't been discussed upstream, this is a feature request for libvirt
and won't be accepted in U2 if this hasn't been accepted upstream first
and integrated in a public libvirt release.
This request was previously evaluated by Red Hat Product Management
for inclusion in the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release, but
Red Hat was unable to resolve it in time. This request will be
reviewed for a future Red Hat Enterprise Linux release.
This could be added to Update 3 if the upstream patch is clearly identified
Actually this was discussed upstream and we decided to not do it,
at least not in the suggested form and the thread upstream ended up at
Based on this I think the most correct is to resolve as WONTFIX, because
that seems the outcome of the upstream discussions,