[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?
From: |
Jan Kiszka |
Subject: |
[Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu? |
Date: |
Sun, 07 Jun 2009 09:35:52 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); de; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080226 SUSE/2.0.0.12-1.1 Thunderbird/2.0.0.12 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 |
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> Maybe the backwards compatibility features should be ported to QEMU?
>>> For example, is there a workaround for
>>> #error Missing KVM capability KVM_CAP_DESTROY_MEMORY_REGION_WORKS
>>> ?
>>>
>>
>> Given that we have always-up-to-date kvm-kmod packages with support down
>> to reasonable kernel versions, I would prefer to keep upstream clean
>> from old workarounds. They should only be needed for issues found very
>> recently (KVM_CAP_JOIN_MEMORY_REGIONS_WORKS) or that might be found in
>> the future.
>>
>
> Requiring the latest up-to-date modules is pushing the problem to the
> users. Sometimes there is no choice, but when there is, the
> implementation that cares about its uses prefer unclean code and
> functionality over perfection and brokenness.
Let's make it more concrete:
By the time upstream is as well tested, feature-rich and with comparable
performance as qemu-kvm, its current baseline requirement (2.6.29 due to
KVM_CAP_DESTROY_MEMORY_REGION_WORKS) will no longer be a problem to most
normal users. Until then they are better off with qemu-kvm anyway.
So all I wanted to express is that I see no point in merging workarounds
upstream that hardly anyone will need but that restrict non-kvm code in
upstream. Basically I have the current line along
KVM_CAP_DESTROY_MEMORY_REGION_WORKS / clean memory slot management in
mind. Anything older should be skipped when merging upstream. And unless
something more problematic comes along (rather unlikely), 2.6.29 or
compatible kvm-kmod is a reasonable minimum requirement for the long term.
Jan
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Re: [Qemu-devel] POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, (continued)
- Re: [Qemu-devel] POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Andreas Färber, 2009/06/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Avi Kivity, 2009/06/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Blue Swirl, 2009/06/06
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Jan Kiszka, 2009/06/06
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Blue Swirl, 2009/06/06
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Jan Kiszka, 2009/06/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Andreas Färber, 2009/06/06
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Avi Kivity, 2009/06/07
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Avi Kivity, 2009/06/07
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?,
Jan Kiszka <=
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Avi Kivity, 2009/06/07
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Blue Swirl, 2009/06/07
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Jan Kiszka, 2009/06/07
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Blue Swirl, 2009/06/07
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Jan Kiszka, 2009/06/07
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Avi Kivity, 2009/06/07
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Jan Kiszka, 2009/06/07
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Avi Kivity, 2009/06/07
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Jan Kiszka, 2009/06/07
- [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?, Avi Kivity, 2009/06/07