From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luiz Capitulino Subject: Re: [RFC] kvm: x86: export vCPU halted state to sysfs Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2018 09:14:26 -0500 Message-ID: <20180202091426.3d02bcad@redhat.com> References: <20180201125441.2f5b4fdd@redhat.com> <20180201201514.GB660@flask> <20180201202649.GG26425@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: Eduardo Habkost , Radim =?UTF-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= , kvm@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, berrange@redhat.com, Peter Krempa , John Ferlan , libvir-list@redhat.com, Christian Borntraeger To: Viktor Mihajlovski Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51668 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751653AbeBBOOg (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2018 09:14:36 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2 Feb 2018 14:53:50 +0100 Viktor Mihajlovski wrote: > On 01.02.2018 21:26, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 09:15:15PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote: > >> 2018-02-01 12:54-0500, Luiz Capitulino: > >>> > >>> Libvirt needs to know when a vCPU is halted. To get this information, > >> > >> I don't see why upper level management should care about that, a single > >> bit about halted state that can be incorrect at the time it is processed > >> seems of very limited use. > > > > I don't see why, either. > > > > I'm CCing libvir-list and the people involved in the code that > > added halt state to libvirt domain statistics. > > > I'll try to explain the motivation for the "halted" state exposure and > why it ended int the libvirt domain stats. > > s390 CPUs can be present in a system (e.g. after being hotplugged) but > be offline (disabled) in which case they are not used by the operating > system. In Linux disabled CPUs show a value of '0' in > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu/online. If that's all you want, have you considered using the guest agent? > Higher level management software (on top of libvirt) can take advantage > of knowing whether a guest CPU is online and thus used or not. > Specifically it might not make sense to plug more CPUs if the guest OS > isn't using the CPUs at all. OK, so what's the algorithm used by the higher level management software where this all fits together? Something like: 1. Hotplug vCPU 2. Poll "halted" state 3. If "halted" becomes true, hotplug more vCPUs 4. If "halted" never becomes true, don't hotplug more CPUs If that's the case, then I guess grepping for State in /proc/qemu-pid/threadid/status will have the same end result, no? > > A disabled guest CPU is represented as halted in the QEMU object model > and can therefore be identified by the QMP query-cpus command. > > The initial patch proposal to expose this via virsh vcpuinfo was not > considered to be desirable because there was a concern that legacy > management software might be confused seeing halted vcpus. Therefore the > state information was added to the cpu domain statistics. > > One issue we're facing is that the semantics of "halted" are different > between s390 and at least x86. The question might be whether they are > different enough to grant a specific "disabled" indicator. > > [...] >