|
From: | Anthony Liguori |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] cpuid problem in upstream qemu with kvm |
Date: | Wed, 06 Jan 2010 09:16:53 -0600 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091209 Fedora/3.0-4.fc12 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0 |
On 01/06/2010 08:48 AM, Dor Laor wrote:
On 01/06/2010 04:32 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:On 01/06/2010 04:22 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:We can probably default -enable-kvm to -cpu host, as long as we explainvery carefully that if users wish to preserve cpu features across upgrades, they can't depend on the default.Hardware upgrades or software upgrades?Yes.I just want to remind all the the main motivation for using -cpu realModelThatWasOnceShiped is to provide correct cpu emulation for the guest. Using a random qemu|kvm64+flag1-flag2 might really cause trouble for the guest OS or guest apps.On top of -cpu nehalem we can always add fancy features like x2apic, etc.
I think it boils down to, how are people going to use this.For individuals, code names like Nehalem are too obscure. From my own personal experience, even power users often have no clue whether there processor is a Nehalem or not.
For management tools, Nehalem is a somewhat imprecise target because it covers a wide range of potential processors. In general, I think what we really need to do is simplify the process of going from, here's the output of /proc/cpuinfo for a 100 nodes, what do I need to pass to qemu so that migration always works for these systems.
I don't think -cpu nehalem really helps with that problem. -cpu none helps a bit, but I hope we can find something nicer.
Regards, Anthony Liguori
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |