[libvirt] [PATCHv7 1/2] qemu: conf Implement domain RBD storage pool support
Ján Tomko
jtomko at redhat.com
Mon Feb 3 16:07:45 UTC 2014
On 01/30/2014 06:06 PM, Adam Walters wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Ján Tomko <jtomko at redhat.com
> <mailto:jtomko at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> On 01/23/2014 08:45 PM, Adam Walters wrote:
> > This patch adds a helper function, qemuAddRBDPoolSourceHost, and
> > implements the usage of this function to allow RBD storage pools in QEMU
> > domain XML.
> >
> > The new function grabs RBD monitor hosts from the storage pool
> > definition and applies them to the domain's disk definition at runtime.
> > This function is used by my modifications to qemuTranslateDiskSourcePool
> > similar to the function used by the iSCSI code.
> >
> > My modifications to qemuTranslateDiskSourcePool is based heavily on the
> > existing iSCSI code, but modified to support RBD install. It will place
> > all relevant information into the domain's disk definition at runtime to
> > allow access to a RBD storage pool.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Adam Walters <adam at pandorasboxen.com
> <mailto:adam at pandorasboxen.com>>
> > ---
> > src/qemu/qemu_conf.c | 62
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c
> > index ac53f6d..b1a6bfe 100644
> > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c
> > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_conf.c
> > @@ -1439,8 +1478,29 @@ qemuTranslateDiskSourcePool(virConnectPtr conn,
> > }
> > break;
> >
> > - case VIR_STORAGE_POOL_MPATH:
> > case VIR_STORAGE_POOL_RBD:
> > + if (def->startupPolicy) {
> > + virReportError(VIR_ERR_XML_ERROR, "%s",
> > + _("'startupPolicy' is only valid for "
> > + "'file' file volume"));
> > + goto cleanup;
> > + }
>
> You should also check if srcpool->mode is DIRECT and document that it's valid
> for rbd pools in docs/formatdomain.html.in <http://formatdomain.html.in>
> in the description of the mode
> attribute.
>
>
> One of my early versions of this patch actually did check srcpool->mode (and
> set it
> to DIRECT if it wasn't set yet), but it was requested that I remove that check
> since
> there was only one mode for RBD pools.
Right, I didn't notice it was already checked above the switch:
if (def->srcpool->mode && pooldef->type != VIR_STORAGE_POOL_ISCSI) {
virReportError(VIR_ERR_XML_ERROR, "%s",
_("disk source mode is only valid when "
"storage pool is of iscsi type"));
goto cleanup;
}
> The removal of that code is what prompted
> my modification to the secret type checking in another patch in this series.
> So which
> is the correct method of implementation? Should pools that only have one access
> mode check for srcpool->mode to be set (and set a default if there isn't a
> setting)?
If there is only one access mode, there is no need to specify it and no need
for a check.
> My original thoughts were that the check would allow for a HOST access mode in the
> future, which might allow use of the kernel rbd module (which creates block
> devices)
> while also knowing the volume was served by Ceph.
>
If that happens, we can allow MODE_DIRECT and MODE_HOST too, along with
MODE_DEFAULT.
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/attachments/20140203/0fe7e020/attachment-0001.sig>
More information about the libvir-list
mailing list