From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0E919646D
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 14:05:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D93C13D08
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 14:05:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
[94.136.29.106])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 24 Jan 2023 14:05:41 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 641E645EAA;
Tue, 24 Jan 2023 14:05:41 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <432de08a-80af-a9ba-58e9-6edc5d705b97@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 14:05:40 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.5.0
From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, "aderumier@odiso.com" <aderumier@odiso.com>
References: <20230104064303.2898194-1-aderumier@odiso.com>
<20230104064303.2898194-6-aderumier@odiso.com>
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <20230104064303.2898194-6-aderumier@odiso.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 3.093 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
NICE_REPLY_A -1.148 Looks like a legit reply (A)
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI -5 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
high trust
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
information. [memory.pm, qemu.pm]
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH v2 qemu-server 5/9] memory: get_max_mem: use
config memory max
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 13:05:43 -0000
Am 04.01.23 um 07:42 schrieb Alexandre Derumier:
> verify than defined vm memorymax is not bigger than
> host cpu supported memory
>
> Add add early check in update vm api
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Derumier <aderumier@odiso.com>
> ---
> PVE/API2/Qemu.pm | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> PVE/QemuServer/Memory.pm | 23 +++++++++++++++++--
> 2 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm
> index 4ffa973..cab1e84 100644
> --- a/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm
> +++ b/PVE/API2/Qemu.pm
> @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ use PVE::QemuServer::Drive;
> use PVE::QemuServer::ImportDisk;
> use PVE::QemuServer::Monitor qw(mon_cmd);
> use PVE::QemuServer::Machine;
> -use PVE::QemuServer::Memory qw(get_current_memory);
> +use PVE::QemuServer::Memory qw(get_current_memory parse_memory get_host_max_mem);
> use PVE::QemuMigrate;
> use PVE::RPCEnvironment;
> use PVE::AccessControl;
> @@ -476,6 +476,35 @@ my $create_disks = sub {
> return ($vollist, $res);
> };
>
> +my $check_memory_param = sub {
> + my ($conf, $param) = @_;
> +
> + my $mem = parse_memory($param->{memory});
> + my $host_max_mem = get_host_max_mem($conf);
> +
> + if ($mem->{max}) {
> + die "memory max can't be bigger than supported cpu architecture $host_max_mem MB\n"
s/MB/MiB
> + if $mem->{max} > $host_max_mem;
Style nit: you could && both conditions to save lines
This could be part of the verifier sub suggested in the last patch
> + }
> +
(...)
> diff --git a/PVE/QemuServer/Memory.pm b/PVE/QemuServer/Memory.pm
> index 1c4f356..20b9bf9 100644
> --- a/PVE/QemuServer/Memory.pm
> +++ b/PVE/QemuServer/Memory.pm
> @@ -13,6 +13,8 @@ use base qw(Exporter);
>
> our @EXPORT_OK = qw(
> get_current_memory
> +parse_memory
> +get_host_max_mem
> );
>
> my $MAX_NUMA = 8;
> @@ -94,7 +96,7 @@ my sub get_host_phys_address_bits {
> return; # undef, cannot really do anything..
> }
>
> -my sub get_max_mem {
> +sub get_host_max_mem {
> my ($conf) = @_;
>
> my $cpu = {};
> @@ -125,7 +127,24 @@ my sub get_max_mem {
> # heuristic: remove 20 bits to get MB and half that as QEMU needs some overhead
> my $bits_to_max_mem = int(1<<($bits - 21));
>
> - return $bits_to_max_mem > 4*1024*1024 ? 4*1024*1024 : $bits_to_max_mem;
> + my $host_max_mem = $bits_to_max_mem > 4*1024*1024 ? 4*1024*1024 : $bits_to_max_mem;
> +
> + return $host_max_mem;
> +}
Nit: useless change?
> +
> +my sub get_max_mem {
> + my ($conf) = @_;
> +
> + my $host_max_mem = get_host_max_mem($conf);
> + my $mem = parse_memory($conf->{memory});
> +
> + if ($mem->{max}) {
> + die "configured memory max can't be bigger than supported cpu architecture $host_max_mem MB\n"
s/MB/MiB/
> + if $mem->{max} > $host_max_mem;
> + return $mem->{max};
> + }
> +
> + return $host_max_mem;
> }
>
> sub get_current_memory {