[libvirt] [PATCH] nodeinfo: fix detection of physical memory on uclibc/musl libc

Daniel P. Berrange berrange at redhat.com
Tue Apr 15 11:30:47 UTC 2014


On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 01:26:27PM +0200, Natanael Copa wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2014 10:37:40 +0100
> "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:31:23AM +0200, Natanael Copa wrote:
> > > The gnulib's physmem_total will as a fallback report 64MB as total
> > > memory if sysconf(_SC_PHYS_PAGES) is unimplemented on linux. This makes
> > > it impossible to detect if physmem_total works or not, so we try first
> > > the linux only sysinfo(2) before falling back to gnulibs physmem_total.
> > > 
> > > This makes the total memory be correctly reported on musl libc and
> > > uclibc.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Natanael Copa <ncopa at alpinelinux.org>
> > > ---
> > >  configure.ac   |  2 +-
> > >  src/nodeinfo.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
> > >  2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > I think you should instead patch the gnulib physmem_total() function
> > to support use of  sysinfo() itself. That way all the many users of
> > GNULIB will work correctly on musl/uclibc, rather than just libvirt.
> 
> the intention was to fix all 3 places:
> 
> * fix libvirt not trust physmem_total
> * fix gnulib to use sysinfo and fallback to sysconf
> * add _SC_PHYS_PAGES support to musl libc
> 
> In any case, the gnulib's physmem_total will most likely always fall
> back to 64MB instead of fail with error since it looks like thats the
> way it is designed. I doubt they will accept fix for that.
> 
> That means that libvirt cannot really trust physmem_total and IMHO it
> should be avoided.

The whole point of physmem_total is that libvirt can avoid having to
have a bunch of different implementations. Any kind of fix that libvirt
could do, can equally be done in the physmem_total, so there's no reason
to not rely on physmem_total. So we only need to fix physmem_total, and
the musl libc.

The only reason to fix libvirt, is if there's some problem that would
prevent us getting the fix into gnulib in an acceptable timeframe.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|




More information about the libvir-list mailing list