Quoting Andrew Jones (2018-08-31 06:22:19) > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 05:51:13PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > Originally these guest agent commands (both getting and setting) were > > meant to be used in the absence of real VCPU hot[un]plug, as a fallback > > / place-holder. > > > > If the latter (= real VCPU hot(un)plug) works, then these guest agent > > commands shouldn't be used at all. > > > > Drew, do I remember correctly? > > Yup. This guest agent functionality was merely a stopgap to support "cpu > hotplug", before real cpu hotplug could be supported. > > > I wonder if, instead of this patch, we should rework > > qmp_guest_get_vcpus(), to silently skip processors for which this > > dirpath ENOENT condition arises (i.e., return a shorter list of > > GuestLogicalProcessor objects). > > That sounds good to me.
+1, otherwise we end up reporting unplugged VCPUs as being present-but-offline by virtue of them being in the returned list, which isn't really the case. > > Thanks, > drew >
