qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] RAMBlock's named ""


From: Igor Mammedov
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RAMBlock's named ""
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 11:31:41 +0100

On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 19:46:56 +0000
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <address@hidden> wrote:

> We seem to have a couple of weird cases where we end up with
> RAMBlocks with no name;  I think they'll badly confuse
> the migration code, but I don't quite understand how they're
> happening.
> 
> 1) device_del e1000e
> 2) -object memory-backend-file  without wiring it up
> 
> I added some debug into migration/ram.c ram_save_setup to
> dump the names it was seeing in it's FOREACH.
> 
> 1)
>   (from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1425273)
>   The simplest reproducer of this is:
> 
> ./qemu-system-x86_64 -nographic  -device e1000e,id=foo -m 1G -M pc,accel=kvm 
> my.img
> 
>   with a Linux image and after it's booted do a device_del foo
> 
>   migration at that point sees an empty RAMBlock that was the ROM
>   associated with the device.  This doesn't happen on an e1000 device,
>   so I've not figured out what the difference is.
> 
>   This gives a : Unknown ramblock "", cannot accept migration
>   on the destination (correctly).
> 
>   (This happens on 2.7.0 as well, so it's nothing new)
> 
> 2)
>   ./qemu-system-x86_64 -nographic -object 
> memory-backend-file,id=mem,size=512M,mem-path=/tmp
> 
>   Note I've not wired that memory to a NUMA node or a DIMM or anything, so
>   it's just hanging around.
>   Again that RAMBlock does exist and shows up in the migration code,
>   I think it'll try and migrate it.
it has to be registered with vmstate_register_ram() which
doesn't happen for non used hostmem object.
See:
  pc_dimm_memory_plug()
and
  memory_region_allocate_system_memory()

> The real fun is that there doesn't seem to be anything that stops
> two blocks having the same name!
code doesn't permit duplicate ids for -object created objects
but memory region api doesn't care about it as long as
memory_region name is unique child name within its parent object
children namespace.

you can do a check for empty / duplicate names at ram_block_add()
time and fail gracefully, but that probably will break things as
it hasn't been expected behavior before.


> 
> Dave
> 
> --
> Dr. David Alan Gilbert / address@hidden / Manchester, UK




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]