[libvirt] [PATCHv8 1/7] bhyve: Support /domain/bootloader configuration for non-FreeBSD guests.
Michal Privoznik
mprivozn at redhat.com
Tue Nov 11 15:40:23 UTC 2014
On 11.11.2014 16:17, Conrad Meyer wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Michal Privoznik <mprivozn at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 08.11.2014 17:48, Conrad Meyer wrote:
>>> +static virCommandPtr
>>> +virBhyveProcessBuildBhyveloadCmd(virDomainDefPtr def, virDomainDiskDefPtr
>>> disk)
>>> {
>>> virCommandPtr cmd;
>>> - virDomainDiskDefPtr disk;
>>>
>>> - if (def->ndisks < 1) {
>>> - virReportError(VIR_ERR_CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED, "%s",
>>> - _("domain should have at least one disk
>>> defined"));
>>> + cmd = virCommandNew(BHYVELOAD);
>>> +
>>> + if (def->os.bootloaderArgs == NULL) {
>>> + VIR_DEBUG("bhyveload with default arguments");
>>> +
>>> + /* Memory (MB) */
>>> + virCommandAddArg(cmd, "-m");
>>> + virCommandAddArgFormat(cmd, "%llu",
>>> + VIR_DIV_UP(def->mem.max_balloon, 1024));
>>
>> One of the things I'm worried about is, if the boot args are not specified
>> we properly add memory configured in domain XML.
>>
>>> +
>>> + /* Image path */
>>> + virCommandAddArg(cmd, "-d");
>>> + virCommandAddArg(cmd, virDomainDiskGetSource(disk));
>>> +
>>> + /* VM name */
>>> + virCommandAddArg(cmd, def->name);
>>> + } else {
>>> + VIR_DEBUG("bhyveload with arguments");
>>> + virAppendBootloaderArgs(cmd, def);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>
>>
>> However, IIUC the memory amount can be overridden with boot args. Is that
>> expected?
>
> Yes. If you use bootloader_args, you get exactly what you ask for and no more.
Well, if one is modifying XML to change booloader_args already he can
change the memory amount there too. What I'm trying to say is, we should
add '-m def->mem.max_balloon' unconditionally. Or do you intend to give
users so much freedom? I worried it can bite us later when libvirt fails
to see the real amount of memory that domain has.
>
>>> +static virCommandPtr
>>> +virBhyveProcessBuildGrubbhyveCmd(virDomainDefPtr def,
>>> + virConnectPtr conn,
>>> + const char *devmap_file,
>>> + char **devicesmap_out)
>>> +{
>>> + virDomainDiskDefPtr disk, cd;
>>> + virBuffer devicemap;
>>> + virCommandPtr cmd;
>>> + size_t i;
>>> +
>>> + if (def->os.bootloaderArgs != NULL)
>>> + return virBhyveProcessBuildCustomLoaderCmd(def);
>>> +
>>> + devicemap = (virBuffer)VIR_BUFFER_INITIALIZER;
>>> +
>>> + /* Search disk list for CD or HDD device. */
>>> + cd = disk = NULL;
>>> + for (i = 0; i < def->ndisks; i++) {
>>> + if (!virBhyveUsableDisk(conn, def->disks[i]))
>>> + continue;
>>> +
>>> + if (cd == NULL &&
>>> + def->disks[i]->device == VIR_DOMAIN_DISK_DEVICE_CDROM) {
>>> + cd = def->disks[i];
>>> + VIR_INFO("Picking %s as boot CD",
>>> virDomainDiskGetSource(cd));
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + if (disk == NULL &&
>>> + def->disks[i]->device == VIR_DOMAIN_DISK_DEVICE_DISK) {
>>> + disk = def->disks[i];
>>> + VIR_INFO("Picking %s as HDD", virDomainDiskGetSource(disk));
>>> + }
>>
>>
>> Can we utilize <boot order='X'/> attribute here?
>
> This has come up before and the answer is yes, but I'd prefer to do so
> in a later patch series; this one is already growing unwieldy.
Agreed. This can be addressed later, when needed.
Michal
More information about the libvir-list
mailing list