Bug 807145 - Can not define xml with 232 disks with multifunction
Summary: Can not define xml with 232 disks with multifunction
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 808980
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: libvirt
Version: 7.0
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Michal Privoznik
QA Contact:
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2012-03-27 07:38 UTC by weizhang
Modified: 2012-06-01 13:22 UTC (History)
12 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2012-06-01 13:22:14 UTC
Target Upstream Version:

Attachments (Terms of Use)
guest xml with 232 usb disks (64.82 KB, text/plain)
2012-03-27 07:38 UTC, weizhang
no flags Details

Description weizhang 2012-03-27 07:38:05 UTC
Created attachment 572957 [details]
guest xml with 232 usb disks

Description of problem:
I try to test multifunction so I create a xml with 232 disks with multifunction, when do define, it report error
# virsh define usb-all.xml 
error: Failed to define domain from usb-all.xml
error: Unable to encode message payload
error: Reconnected to the hypervisor

if I remove 3 disks, then define can be succeed, but when do dumpxml, it still report error 
# virsh dumpxml usb
error: Unable to encode message payload
error: Reconnected to the hypervisor

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Define a guest with xml in attachment
# virsh define guest.xml
Actual results:
Report error

Expected results:
Should succeed both for define and dumpxml

Additional info:

Comment 1 Daniel Berrangé 2012-03-27 09:34:26 UTC
The XML file is 66375 bytes long, and our maximum RPC string size is 65536 bytes. When dumping the XML file, it will grow as libvirt adds in various default attributes.

Comment 2 Dave Allan 2012-03-27 17:56:11 UTC
So what does a user with such a VM do?

Comment 4 Ronen Hod 2012-03-28 16:44:48 UTC
Note that until we support PCI bridge it might also be related to

Comment 5 Dave Allan 2012-04-26 19:33:40 UTC
Michal, I think this can be closed as a dup of one of the other BZs in which the maximum RPC size was exceeded, but I'll leave that up to you.

Comment 6 Michal Privoznik 2012-06-01 13:22:14 UTC
Yes. This is definitely a dup of bug 808980 and bug 797279. Therefore I am closing this one.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 808980 ***

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.