On 07/02/2015 05:46 AM, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
...
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/virsh-domain.c b/tools/virsh-domain.c
>> index 27d62e9..334fd3a 100644
>> --- a/tools/virsh-domain.c
>> +++ b/tools/virsh-domain.c
>> @@ -6497,6 +6497,19 @@ cmdVcpuPin(vshControl *ctl, const vshCmd *cmd)
>> goto cleanup;
>> }
>>
>> + if (got_vcpu && vcpu >= ncpus) {
>> + if (flags & VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE ||
>> + (flags & VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_CURRENT &&
>> virDomainIsActive(dom) == 1))
>> + vshError(ctl,
>> + _("vcpu %d is out of range of live cpu count %d"),
>> + vcpu, ncpus);
>> + else
>> + vshError(ctl,
>> + _("vcpu %d is out of range of persistent cpu
>> count %d"),
>> + vcpu, ncpus);
>> + goto cleanup;
>> + }
>> +
>> cpumaplen = VIR_CPU_MAPLEN(maxcpu);
>> cpumap = vshMalloc(ctl, ncpus * cpumaplen);
>> if ((ncpus = virDomainGetVcpuPinInfo(dom, ncpus, cpumap,
>>
>
> This modification is much better and correspond to the error messages while
> setting the vcpu pinning.
>
I just pushed this now - it'd need a bz for a backport (ahem) since
1.2.17 was cut before the push...
commit 848ab685f74afae102e265108518095942ecb293
Author: Luyao Huang <lhu...@redhat.com>
Date: Mon Jun 29 10:10:15 2015 +0800
virsh: report error if vcpu number exceed the guest maxvcpu number
John
>>>
>>> Before I make that change for you - hopefully Pavel can take a look as
>>> well to be sure I haven't missed something.
>>>
>>> With any luck we this could be addressed before the 1.2.17 release, but
>>> if not since it's been a regression since 1.2.13 and no one's noticed,
>>> then another release probably won't hurt.
>>
>> Right, if we can fix it in 1.2.17, it will be better :)
>>
>> Thanks a lot for your help and review.
>>
>
> ACK to the patch than John updated and proposed.
>
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
