osdir.com


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

[ubuntu] Known that qemu 4.2 is incompatible with GCP instances?


On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 2:04 PM James Page <james.page at canonical.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 1:08 PM James Page <james.page at canonical.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Neil
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 11:59 AM Neil Jerram <neil at tigera.io> wrote:
>>
>>> I run tests with GCP instances as the OpenStack hypervisors.  Obviously
>>> it's better if those can use libvirt_type kvm, i.e. nested virtualization,
>>> and this has been possible prior to my current Ussuri upgrade work.
>>>
>>> With Ussuri on Ubuntu, IIUC, we get qemu 4.2 from cloud-archive:ussuri,
>>> but qemu 4.2 has a bug that was fixed by this commit prior to 5.0.0:
>>> https://github.com/qemu/qemu/commit/4a910e1f6ab4155ec8b24c49b2585cc486916985
>>>
>>>     target/i386: do not set unsupported VMX secondary execution controls
>>>
>>>     Commit 048c951 ("target/i386: work around KVM_GET_MSRS bug for
>>>     secondary execution controls") added a workaround for KVM pre-dating
>>>     commit 6defc591846d ("KVM: nVMX: include conditional controls in
>>> /dev/kvm
>>>     KVM_GET_MSRS") which wasn't setting certain available controls. The
>>>     workaround uses generic CPUID feature bits to set missing VMX
>>> controls. [...]
>>>
>>> The bug manifests on a GCP instance with nested virtualization enabled
>>> [1], because such a GCP instance doesn't support MSR features.  The
>>> OpenStack-level symptom is that a VM can't be scheduled onto that GCP
>>> instance.
>>>
>>> Is this a well-known problem?  For CentOS/RHEL, [2] looks similar and
>>> maybe fixed, but it's difficult to be sure.
>>>
>>
>> I could not an existing bug in Ubuntu describing these symptoms - any
>> chance you can report a bug here:
>>
>>   https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qemu/+filebug
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qemu/+bug/1882774
>

Many thanks James, that's exactly it.  I've just commented on the bug to
ask if it would be easy to build packages for Bionic (as well as for Focal).

Best wishes,
    Neil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20200609/06fcaa09/attachment.html>