cloudstack-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "ASF GitHub Bot (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CLOUDSTACK-9379) Support nested virtualization at VM level on VMware Hypervisor
Date Wed, 10 Aug 2016 20:58:20 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9379?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15415999#comment-15415999
] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on CLOUDSTACK-9379:
--------------------------------------------

Github user rafaelweingartner commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1542
  
    @nvazquez long time we don’t do this ;)
    
    First of all, your PR explanation is great. The code is very well documented and explained
and with test cases (very good ones). Congratulations. I really like your work. 
    
    I have some suggestions for you, though.
    
    I think that the method “enableNestedVirtualization” could return a Boolean. I see
no need to transform the Boolean in a String there; It seems better to use Boolean.toString(bool)
at line 376. Moreover, when reading the method “enableNestedVirtualization”, I felt like
it was going to enable something on the VM, which is not the case. This looks more a “should”,
“can”, “has” type of method. I mean, it is a method that checks if something has to/should/can
be done; in this case, the enabling of nested virtualization. Therefore, I think names such
as “canUseNestedVirtualization”, “should enableNestedVirtualization”, “hasToEnableNestedVirtualization”
seem more appropriate.
    
    I also think that the code has room for improvements. First, to reduce the cyclomatic
complexity, you can invert the first if, which become something like this:
    ```
    if (globalNestedV == null || globalNestedVPerVM == null) {
        return false;
    }
    ```
    Then, the other conditional can be further improved. It is a bit complicated. Something
like this would have the same result:
    ```
    if (globalNVPVM) {
                return (localNestedV == null && globalNV) || BooleanUtils.toBoolean(localNestedV);
            }
      return globalNV;
    ```
    
    On method “configNestedVirtualization”, I would just suggest using the word “configure”
instead of “config”. At least for me, when I read config, I think configuration and not
configure (this is a very personal opinion, so if you are ok with config, be my guest). A
method, for me, means an action that is executed, so it seems a better fit the word “configure”
(verb).
    
    The method “testConfigNestedVirtualization”, I think it should check if the “VmDetailConstants.NESTED_VIRTUALIZATION_FLAG”
flag (parameter) is being loaded properly from the “vmDetails”. I also suggest you using
the “inOrder” to verify the calls in order. If the order of the calls changes, the behavior
of the method changes too, right?
    
    About the method “enableNestedVirtualizationBaseTest”, I think it could be a little
bit more self-explaining, such as: executeAndVerify<nameOfTheMethod>Test.
    
    And finally, about the others test methods, I think instead of TFT, TFN, and others at
the end, I think if you were a bit more literal, and self-explaining, it would be better.
For instance, the test method “testEnableNestedVirtualizationCaseTFF”, in a more detailed
version, could be read as “testEnableNestedVirtualizationCaseGlobalNvTrueGlobalNvPvFalseLocalVmfalse”.
I know it is a huge method name, but I think it facilitates for newcomers and also for the
@nvazquez of the future ;)


> Support nested virtualization at VM level on VMware Hypervisor
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CLOUDSTACK-9379
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9379
>             Project: CloudStack
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>      Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the default.) 
>          Components: VMware
>    Affects Versions: 4.9.0
>            Reporter: Nicolas Vazquez
>            Assignee: Nicolas Vazquez
>
> h2. Introduction
> It is desired to support nested virtualization at VM level for VMware hypervisor. Current
behaviour supports enabling/desabling global nested virtualization by modifying global config
{{'vmware.nested.virtualization'}}. It is wished to improve this feature, having control at
VM level instead of a global control only.
> h2. Proposal
> A new global configuration is added, to enable/disable VM nested virtualization control:
{{'vmware.nested.virtualization.perVM'}}. Default value=false
> h2. Behaviour
> After a vm deployment or start command, vm params include {{nestedVirtualizationFlag}}
key and its value is:
> * true -> nested virtualization enabled
> * false -> nested virtualization disabled
> We will determinate nested virtualization enabled/disabled by examining:
> * (1) global configuration {{'vmware.nested.virtualization'}} value
> * (2) global configuration {{'vmware.nested.virtualization.perVM'}} value
> * (3) {{'nestedVirtualizationFlag'}} value in {{user_vm_details}} if present, null if
not.
> Using this 3 values, there are different use cases:
> # (1) = TRUE, (2) = TRUE, (3) is null -> ENABLED
> # (1) = TRUE, (2) = TRUE, (3) = TRUE -> ENABLED
> # (1) = TRUE, (2) = TRUE, (3) = FALSE -> DISABLED
> # (1) = TRUE, (2) = FALSE -> ENABLED
> # (1) = FALSE, (2) = TRUE, (3) is null -> DISABLED
> # (1) = FALSE, (2) = TRUE, (3) = TRUE -> ENABLED
> # (1) = FALSE, (2) = TRUE, (3) = FALSE -> DISABLED
> # (1) = FALSE, (2) = FALSE -> DISABLED



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message