[PATCH v1 1/4] qemu_domain.c: do not launch ppc64 guests with APIC-EOI setting

[Daniel Henrique Barboza]

On 3/23/20 2:45 PM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-03-23 at 14:21 -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
>> On 3/23/20 2:01 PM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
>>> This is
>>>
>>>     https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1236440
>>>
>>> Please include the Bugzilla URL for other patches in the series
>>> as well, if applicable.
>>
>> Sure. I didn't include the link because it can't be opened unless you have a RH bugzilla
>> account and I wasn't sure I could add it here.
> 
> Oh, I did not realize that bug was private. That's very silly. I'll
> ask for it to be made public.
> 
>> And while we're at it, something that just occurred to me, I'll also gate the ppc64
>> only capabilities as well in a new patch.
> 
> Yeah, that makes sense too. We're probably never going to get to a
> point where these checks are completely accurate, but any improvement
> can only be a welcome one :)

Just realized that we're already doing that here:

         case VIR_DOMAIN_FEATURE_HPT:
         case VIR_DOMAIN_FEATURE_HTM:
         case VIR_DOMAIN_FEATURE_NESTED_HV:
         case VIR_DOMAIN_FEATURE_CCF_ASSIST:
             if (qemuDomainDefValidatePSeriesFeature(def, qemuCaps, i) < 0)
                 return -1;
             break;


qemuDomainDefValidatePseriesFeature() filters if the arch is ppc64:

static int
qemuDomainDefValidatePSeriesFeature(const virDomainDef *def,
                                     virQEMUCapsPtr qemuCaps,
                                     int feature)
{
     const char *str;

     if (def->features[feature] != VIR_TRISTATE_SWITCH_ABSENT &&
         !qemuDomainIsPSeries(def)) {
         virReportError(VIR_ERR_CONFIG_UNSUPPORTED,
                        _("The '%s' feature is not supported for "
                          "architecture '%s' or machine type '%s'"),
                        virDomainFeatureTypeToString(feature),
                        virArchToString(def->os.arch),
                        def->os.machine);
         return -1;
     }
(...)


There is no need for an extra patch to handle it.



Thanks,


DHB



>