| Message ID | 1361475979-26684-1-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: > This allows "," to be used a separator between each CPU range. Note > that commas inside key=value command-line options have to be escaped > using ",,", so the command-line will look like: > > -numa node,cpus=A,,B,,C,,D This is really, really ugly, and an embarrassment to document. Which you didn't ;) What about -numa node,cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C,cpus=D Yes, QemuOpts lets you do that. Getting all the values isn't as easy as it could be (unless you use Laszlo's opt-visitor), but that could be improved. > Note that the following format, currently used by libvirt: > > -numa nodes,cpus=A,B,C,D > > will _not_ work yet, as "," is the option separator for the command-line > option parser, and it will require changing the -numa option parsing > code to handle "cpus" as a special case. No way.
Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> writes: > Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: > >> This allows "," to be used a separator between each CPU range. Note >> that commas inside key=value command-line options have to be escaped >> using ",,", so the command-line will look like: >> >> -numa node,cpus=A,,B,,C,,D > > This is really, really ugly, and an embarrassment to document. Which > you didn't ;) > > What about > > -numa node,cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C,cpus=D > > Yes, QemuOpts lets you do that. Getting all the values isn't as easy as > it could be (unless you use Laszlo's opt-visitor), but that could be > improved. No more of this. -numa node,cpus=A:B:C:D if you want to express a list. Regards, Anthony Liguori > >> Note that the following format, currently used by libvirt: >> >> -numa nodes,cpus=A,B,C,D >> >> will _not_ work yet, as "," is the option separator for the command-line >> option parser, and it will require changing the -numa option parsing >> code to handle "cpus" as a special case. > > No way.
Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> writes: > Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> writes: > >> Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: >> >>> This allows "," to be used a separator between each CPU range. Note >>> that commas inside key=value command-line options have to be escaped >>> using ",,", so the command-line will look like: >>> >>> -numa node,cpus=A,,B,,C,,D >> >> This is really, really ugly, and an embarrassment to document. Which >> you didn't ;) >> >> What about >> >> -numa node,cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C,cpus=D >> >> Yes, QemuOpts lets you do that. Getting all the values isn't as easy as >> it could be (unless you use Laszlo's opt-visitor), but that could be >> improved. > > No more of this. > > -numa node,cpus=A:B:C:D > > if you want to express a list. Okay for command line and human monitor, just don't let it bleed into QMP.
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 09:23:22PM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: > > > This allows "," to be used a separator between each CPU range. Note > > that commas inside key=value command-line options have to be escaped > > using ",,", so the command-line will look like: > > > > -numa node,cpus=A,,B,,C,,D > > This is really, really ugly, and an embarrassment to document. Which > you didn't ;) I was trying to have an intermediate solution using the current -numa parser. I have patches in my queue that will change the code to properly use QemuOpts later. It would be interesting to support the "A,B,C,D" format in config files, though, as it is simple and straighforward when no escaping is required. > > What about > > -numa node,cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C,cpus=D Looks better for the command-line usage, at least. I will give it a try. > > Yes, QemuOpts lets you do that. Getting all the values isn't as easy as > it could be (unless you use Laszlo's opt-visitor), but that could be > improved. Guess what: -numa doesn't even use QemuOpts, and I am not sure the current format of -numa will allow QemuOpts to be used easily. I expect the proper solution using QemuOpts to involve having a standards-compliant "numa-node" config section instead of this weird "-numa <type>,..." format where the only valid <type> that ever existed was "node". But I believe it will be feasible to allow "cpus=A,cpus=B" using the current parser, before we convert to a proper QemuOpts-based implementaiton. > > > Note that the following format, currently used by libvirt: > > > > -numa nodes,cpus=A,B,C,D > > > > will _not_ work yet, as "," is the option separator for the command-line > > option parser, and it will require changing the -numa option parsing > > code to handle "cpus" as a special case. > > No way. Agreed. :-) The bad news is that libvirt uses this format since forever, this format never worked, and nobody ever noticed that this was broken.
Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> writes: > Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> writes: > >> Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> writes: >> >>> Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: >>> >>>> This allows "," to be used a separator between each CPU range. Note >>>> that commas inside key=value command-line options have to be escaped >>>> using ",,", so the command-line will look like: >>>> >>>> -numa node,cpus=A,,B,,C,,D >>> >>> This is really, really ugly, and an embarrassment to document. Which >>> you didn't ;) >>> >>> What about >>> >>> -numa node,cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C,cpus=D >>> >>> Yes, QemuOpts lets you do that. Getting all the values isn't as easy as >>> it could be (unless you use Laszlo's opt-visitor), but that could be >>> improved. >> >> No more of this. >> >> -numa node,cpus=A:B:C:D >> >> if you want to express a list. > > Okay for command line and human monitor, just don't let it bleed into > QMP. Footnotes: 1. Using colons for lists works only as long as the list elements don't contain colons. Fine for numbers. No good for filenames, network addresses, ... 2. QemuOpts helped us reduce the number of ad hoc option parsers, improving consistency and error messages quite a bit. Having every user of colon lists roll their own ad hoc parser slides back into the hole that motivated QemuOpts. Let's try to avoid that, please. 3. The existing QemuOpts syntax for list-valued options (repeating the option) doesn't have either of these problems.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 11:04:24AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> writes: > > > Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> writes: > > > >> Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> writes: > >> > >>> Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: > >>> > >>>> This allows "," to be used a separator between each CPU range. Note > >>>> that commas inside key=value command-line options have to be escaped > >>>> using ",,", so the command-line will look like: > >>>> > >>>> -numa node,cpus=A,,B,,C,,D > >>> > >>> This is really, really ugly, and an embarrassment to document. Which > >>> you didn't ;) > >>> > >>> What about > >>> > >>> -numa node,cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C,cpus=D > >>> > >>> Yes, QemuOpts lets you do that. Getting all the values isn't as easy as > >>> it could be (unless you use Laszlo's opt-visitor), but that could be > >>> improved. > >> > >> No more of this. > >> > >> -numa node,cpus=A:B:C:D > >> > >> if you want to express a list. > > > > Okay for command line and human monitor, just don't let it bleed into > > QMP. > > Footnotes: > > 1. Using colons for lists works only as long as the list elements don't > contain colons. Fine for numbers. No good for filenames, network > addresses, ... > > 2. QemuOpts helped us reduce the number of ad hoc option parsers, > improving consistency and error messages quite a bit. Having every user > of colon lists roll their own ad hoc parser slides back into the hole > that motivated QemuOpts. Let's try to avoid that, please. > > 3. The existing QemuOpts syntax for list-valued options (repeating the > option) doesn't have either of these problems. The problem here seems to be that we want to reuse option parsing code, but the only reusable syntax we have for command-line options today is awful (at least for representing lists). So our only options seem to be: 1) accept some ugliness and things like "A,,B,,C" or "cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C"; 2) write ad hoc option parsers; 3) define/choose a new reusable syntax. We already have at least 2 better ways to represent config data (config files and QMP+JSON), but why do we insist in using command-line options with an awful syntax for everything?
On 02/21/2013 01:57 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >>> Note that the following format, currently used by libvirt: >>> >>> -numa nodes,cpus=A,B,C,D >>> >>> will _not_ work yet, as "," is the option separator for the command-line >>> option parser, and it will require changing the -numa option parsing >>> code to handle "cpus" as a special case. >> >> No way. > > Agreed. :-) > > The bad news is that libvirt uses this format since forever, this format > never worked, and nobody ever noticed that this was broken. Well, libvirt just entered freeze for 1.0.3. I think the best course of action on libvirt's side is to patch 1.0.3 to flat-out reject any cpumap that cannot be represented in a syntax understood by qemu 1.4; then a future libvirt can re-add support for whatever new syntax qemu 1.5 deems as appropriate.
Am 21.02.2013 21:57, schrieb Eduardo Habkost: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 09:23:22PM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: >> >>> This allows "," to be used a separator between each CPU range. Note >>> that commas inside key=value command-line options have to be escaped >>> using ",,", so the command-line will look like: >>> >>> -numa node,cpus=A,,B,,C,,D >> >> This is really, really ugly, and an embarrassment to document. Which >> you didn't ;) > > I was trying to have an intermediate solution using the current -numa > parser. I have patches in my queue that will change the code to properly > use QemuOpts later. Speaking of which, have you considered using QemuOpts for -cpu? Its custom parsing code will probably not handle , escaping at all. ;) Andreas
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 09:23:22PM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: >> >> > This allows "," to be used a separator between each CPU range. Note >> > that commas inside key=value command-line options have to be escaped >> > using ",,", so the command-line will look like: >> > >> > -numa node,cpus=A,,B,,C,,D >> >> This is really, really ugly, and an embarrassment to document. Which >> you didn't ;) > > I was trying to have an intermediate solution using the current -numa > parser. I have patches in my queue that will change the code to properly > use QemuOpts later. > > It would be interesting to support the "A,B,C,D" format in config files, > though, as it is simple and straighforward when no escaping is required. Our config file syntax is in a Windows INI dialect: key=value lines grouped into sections. Our dialect requires values to be enclosed in quotes. Commonly, the quotes are optional. Could be fixed. It supports multi-valued keys the common INI way: multiple key=value lines for the same key, one per value key = "A,B,C" works when the A, B, C can't contain commas. Fine for a list of numbers. For long lists, we'd probably want to add a line continuation feature. Strings can contain commas, so you'd have to do something like key = "A", "B", "C". Whether that's still Windows INI is debatable. More so since there's already a common way to do it: one line per value. If we decide INI doesn't meet our needs or desires for pretty syntax, we should not extend it beyond its limits into QEMU's very own configuration syntax. We should switch to a common syntax that serves our needs and desires. For what it's worth, we already parse JSON. For me, the INI way to do multi-valued keys is still fine. >> What about >> >> -numa node,cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C,cpus=D > > Looks better for the command-line usage, at least. I will give it a try. > >> >> Yes, QemuOpts lets you do that. Getting all the values isn't as easy as >> it could be (unless you use Laszlo's opt-visitor), but that could be >> improved. > > Guess what: -numa doesn't even use QemuOpts, and I am not sure the > current format of -numa will allow QemuOpts to be used easily. I expect > the proper solution using QemuOpts to involve having a > standards-compliant "numa-node" config section instead of this weird > "-numa <type>,..." format where the only valid <type> that ever existed > was "node". This is the current -numa syntax, as far as I can tell: -numa node,KEY=VALUE,... Recognized KEY=VALUE: nodeid=UINT mem=SIZE cpus=[|UINT|UINT-UINT] Unrecognized KEYs are silently ignored. This should fit into QemuOpts just fine. Sketch: static QemuOptsList qemu_numa_opts = { .name = "numa", .implied_opt_name = "type" .head = QTAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER(qemu_rtc_numa.head), .desc = { { .name = "type", .type = QEMU_OPT_STRING, .help = "node type" }, { .name = "nodeid", .type = QEMU_OPT_NUMBER, .help = "node ID" }, { .name = "mem", .type = QEMU_OPT_SIZE, .help = "memory size" }, { .name = "cpus", .type = QEMU_OPT_STRING, .help = "CPU range" }, { /* end of list */ } }, }; type = qemu_opt_get(opts); if (!type || strcmp(type, "node)) { // error } // get and record nodeid, mem // get, parse and record cpus This rejects unrecognized keys, unlike the current code. Declare bug fix ;) To support discontinuous CPU sets, simply get all values of key "cpus". > But I believe it will be feasible to allow "cpus=A,cpus=B" using the > current parser, before we convert to a proper QemuOpts-based > implementaiton. > >> >> > Note that the following format, currently used by libvirt: >> > >> > -numa nodes,cpus=A,B,C,D >> > >> > will _not_ work yet, as "," is the option separator for the command-line >> > option parser, and it will require changing the -numa option parsing >> > code to handle "cpus" as a special case. >> >> No way. > > Agreed. :-) > > The bad news is that libvirt uses this format since forever, this format > never worked, and nobody ever noticed that this was broken. The good news is that it never worked, which simplifies our backward compatibility worries.
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:04:07PM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 21.02.2013 21:57, schrieb Eduardo Habkost: > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 09:23:22PM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: > >> Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: > >> > >>> This allows "," to be used a separator between each CPU range. Note > >>> that commas inside key=value command-line options have to be escaped > >>> using ",,", so the command-line will look like: > >>> > >>> -numa node,cpus=A,,B,,C,,D > >> > >> This is really, really ugly, and an embarrassment to document. Which > >> you didn't ;) > > > > I was trying to have an intermediate solution using the current -numa > > parser. I have patches in my queue that will change the code to properly > > use QemuOpts later. > > Speaking of which, have you considered using QemuOpts for -cpu? Its > custom parsing code will probably not handle , escaping at all. ;) It may be possible, but I'm not sure QemuOpts can handle the "+foo,-foo" options (and I am sure we don't want to extend QemuOpts to support them). In either case, it's better to do that after we simplify x86_cpu_parse_featurestr() (with the current patches from Igor), to make the conversion easier to review later.
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:53:07AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 09:23:22PM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: > >> Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes: > >> > >> > This allows "," to be used a separator between each CPU range. Note > >> > that commas inside key=value command-line options have to be escaped > >> > using ",,", so the command-line will look like: > >> > > >> > -numa node,cpus=A,,B,,C,,D > >> > >> This is really, really ugly, and an embarrassment to document. Which > >> you didn't ;) > > > > I was trying to have an intermediate solution using the current -numa > > parser. I have patches in my queue that will change the code to properly > > use QemuOpts later. > > > > It would be interesting to support the "A,B,C,D" format in config files, > > though, as it is simple and straighforward when no escaping is required. > > Our config file syntax is in a Windows INI dialect: key=value lines > grouped into sections. Our dialect requires values to be enclosed in > quotes. Commonly, the quotes are optional. Could be fixed. It > supports multi-valued keys the common INI way: multiple key=value lines > for the same key, one per value > > key = "A,B,C" works when the A, B, C can't contain commas. Fine for a > list of numbers. For long lists, we'd probably want to add a line > continuation feature. > > Strings can contain commas, so you'd have to do something like key = > "A", "B", "C". Whether that's still Windows INI is debatable. More so > since there's already a common way to do it: one line per value. I was only thinking about the -numa option problem. Having a more generic solution would surely be even better. > > If we decide INI doesn't meet our needs or desires for pretty syntax, we > should not extend it beyond its limits into QEMU's very own > configuration syntax. We should switch to a common syntax that serves > our needs and desires. For what it's worth, we already parse JSON. I completely agree. But by now I just want to know what we should do while we don't have a generic parser/syntax that can handle lists in a pretty way. So: > > For me, the INI way to do multi-valued keys is still fine. Having multiple-valued keys (cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C) seems like the best intermediate solution while we don't have a decent generic syntax. Except that Anthony doesn't like it. Anthony, care to explain why exactly you don't want it? > > >> What about > >> > >> -numa node,cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C,cpus=D > > > > Looks better for the command-line usage, at least. I will give it a try. > > > >> > >> Yes, QemuOpts lets you do that. Getting all the values isn't as easy as > >> it could be (unless you use Laszlo's opt-visitor), but that could be > >> improved. > > > > Guess what: -numa doesn't even use QemuOpts, and I am not sure the > > current format of -numa will allow QemuOpts to be used easily. I expect > > the proper solution using QemuOpts to involve having a > > standards-compliant "numa-node" config section instead of this weird > > "-numa <type>,..." format where the only valid <type> that ever existed > > was "node". > > This is the current -numa syntax, as far as I can tell: > > -numa node,KEY=VALUE,... > > Recognized KEY=VALUE: > > nodeid=UINT > mem=SIZE > cpus=[|UINT|UINT-UINT] > > Unrecognized KEYs are silently ignored. > > This should fit into QemuOpts just fine. Sketch: > > static QemuOptsList qemu_numa_opts = { > .name = "numa", > .implied_opt_name = "type" > .head = QTAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER(qemu_rtc_numa.head), > .desc = { > { > .name = "type", > .type = QEMU_OPT_STRING, > .help = "node type" > }, The "node" part is not a "node type", it is an "numa option type", and the only valid "option type" today is "node" (which is what makes the current syntax seem weird to me). I would simply drop the "numa" part from the command-line argument and name the new config section "numa-node". I will send patches to do that, later. > { > .name = "nodeid", > .type = QEMU_OPT_NUMBER, > .help = "node ID" > }, { > .name = "mem", > .type = QEMU_OPT_SIZE, > .help = "memory size" > }, { I need to double-check that QEMU_OPT_SIZE has exactly the same behavior of the ad-hoc parser, first. > .name = "cpus", > .type = QEMU_OPT_STRING, > .help = "CPU range" > }, > { /* end of list */ } > }, > }; > > > type = qemu_opt_get(opts); > if (!type || strcmp(type, "node)) { > // error > } > // get and record nodeid, mem > // get, parse and record cpus > > This rejects unrecognized keys, unlike the current code. Declare bug > fix ;) Good. :-) > > To support discontinuous CPU sets, simply get all values of key "cpus". I think I have an unfinished work branch that did that. But Paolo also have a similar patch on his tree that does the conversion to QemuOpts in a much simpler way. In either case, first I need to check if QemuOpts will match the ad-hoc parser behavior, because they use different integer/size parser functions. > > > But I believe it will be feasible to allow "cpus=A,cpus=B" using the > > current parser, before we convert to a proper QemuOpts-based > > implementaiton. > > > >> > >> > Note that the following format, currently used by libvirt: > >> > > >> > -numa nodes,cpus=A,B,C,D > >> > > >> > will _not_ work yet, as "," is the option separator for the command-line > >> > option parser, and it will require changing the -numa option parsing > >> > code to handle "cpus" as a special case. > >> > >> No way. > > > > Agreed. :-) > > > > The bad news is that libvirt uses this format since forever, this format > > never worked, and nobody ever noticed that this was broken. > > The good news is that it never worked, which simplifies our backward > compatibility worries. Note that only the multiple-CPU-ranges use-case is broken. It works if all NUMA nodes have simple "A-B" CPU ranges.
Il 26/02/2013 15:04, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto: >> > For me, the INI way to do multi-valued keys is still fine. > Having multiple-valued keys (cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C) seems like the best > intermediate solution while we don't have a decent generic syntax. Even more so since: 1) we already support it for -net; 2) our config file format is not a random INI variant, it's explicitly based on git's config file format, and it supports multiple-valued keys. For example here is a stanza of my .git/config file. [remote "mirror"] url = git://github.com/bonzini/qemu.git pushurl = git@github.com:bonzini/qemu.git fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/mirror/* push = +refs/heads/*:refs/heads/* push = +refs/heads/master:refs/heads/integration push = +refs/remotes/origin/master:refs/heads/master push = +refs/tags/*:refs/tags/* Paolo > Except that Anthony doesn't like it. > Anthony, care to explain why exactly you don't want it? > >
diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c index 955d2ff..cd247be 100644 --- a/vl.c +++ b/vl.c @@ -1244,7 +1244,7 @@ char *get_boot_devices_list(size_t *size) return list; } -static void numa_node_parse_cpus(int nodenr, const char *cpus) +static void numa_node_parse_cpu_range(int nodenr, const char *cpus) { char *endptr; unsigned long long value, endvalue; @@ -1288,6 +1288,18 @@ error: exit(1); } +static void numa_node_parse_cpus(int nodenr, const char *option) +{ + char **parts; + int i; + + parts = g_strsplit(option, ",", 0); + for (i = 0; parts[i]; i++) { + numa_node_parse_cpu_range(nodenr, parts[i]); + } + g_strfreev(parts); +} + static void numa_add(const char *optarg) { char option[128];
This allows "," to be used a separator between each CPU range. Note that commas inside key=value command-line options have to be escaped using ",,", so the command-line will look like: -numa node,cpus=A,,B,,C,,D Note that the following format, currently used by libvirt: -numa nodes,cpus=A,B,C,D will _not_ work yet, as "," is the option separator for the command-line option parser, and it will require changing the -numa option parsing code to handle "cpus" as a special case. Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> --- vl.c | 14 +++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)