Thank you all for your feedback, I moved the feature to implementation status.
Patches:
- engine
(vdsm guys still need to decide
which one do they want)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
To: snmishra(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2012 9:56:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] host cpu feature
On 12/05/2012 09:15 PM, snmishra(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
>
> Quoting Doron Fediuck <dfediuck(a)redhat.com>:
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak(a)redhat.com>
>>> To: "Doron Fediuck" <dfediuck(a)redhat.com>
>>> Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2012 7:14:46 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] host cpu feature
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> > From: "Doron Fediuck" <dfediuck(a)redhat.com>
>>> > To: "Yaniv Kaul" <ykaul(a)redhat.com>
>>> > Cc: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak(a)redhat.com>,
"engine-devel"
>>> > <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
>>> > Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2012 6:10:55 PM
>>> > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] host cpu feature
>>> >
>>> > > Alternative idea, inspired by "Thus, if you hit any bugs,
you
>>> > > are
>>> > > on
>>> > > your own" (
http://libvirt.org/formatdomain.html#elementsCPU
>>> > > wrt
>>> > > 'host-passthrough'):
>>> > > A config option to determine if we use host-model or
>>> > > host-passthrough.
>>> > > Y.
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > I do not think the engine should go to this level.
>>> > ie- it can ask for passthrough as a feature, and the
>>> > actual implementation is handled by vdsm.
>>> >
>>>
>>> If vdsm decides over host-passthrough or host-model, then how
>>> will
>>> the engine user know what exactly his VM gets. I think vdsm must
>>> be
>>> told exactly what to do.
>>>
>>
>> VDSM maintains some level of independence. This is why it the
>> engine
>> should be able to ask for passthrough as a feature. Otherwize vdsm
>> will
>> handle it. So for now I suggest we stick to passthrough only, and
>> if
>> we get an RFE for advanced mode we'll support the host model.
>
> What are we gaining by using passthrough over host-model? Looking
> at
> libvirt documentation, it seems that both modes give host CPU
> capabilities to guest VM. Whereas the downside of passthrough is
> that it
> limits migration. Whereas host-model will migrate to other hardware
> and
> if the destination hardware is better than source then the guest VM
> performance can be improved by rebooting guest.
>
> As a stretch goal, ovirt can keep track of host capabilities and
> inform
> the user after migrating to a better host, that a reboot may
> improve
> guest performance.
pass-through may give better performance.
host-model would be relevant when we can support live migration
inside
the cluster for some of the nodes, which will be relevant when the
scheduler is more pluggable/extendable than today.
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel