|
From: | Dor Laor |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] cpuid problem in upstream qemu with kvm |
Date: | Thu, 07 Jan 2010 14:17:49 +0200 |
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 ThunderBrowse/3.2.6.8 |
On 01/07/2010 01:59 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 01/07/2010 11:40 AM, Dor Laor wrote:There's no such thing as Nehalem.Intel were ok with it. Again, you can name is corei7 or xeon34234234234, I don't care, the principle remains the same.There are several processors belonging to the Nehalem family and each have different features.
We can start with the older one, and once it get's that important add the newer ones. Until that happens users can either use -host or have nehalem,+sse4_2,+newFeature
What's not simple about the above 4 options?If a qemu/kvm/processor combo doesn't support a feature (say, nx) we have to remove it from the migration pool even if the Nehalem processor class says it's included. Or else not admit that combination into the migration pool in the first place.
It still management role to compute least common denominator for live migration sets.
btw: for nx disabled bios, we should just ignore it from product. Qemu direct users should add ,-nx
What's a better alternative (that insures users understand it and use it and guest msi and even skype application is happy about it)?Have management scan new nodes and classify them.
Of course. Just don't let management control stepping automatically, it should only be made for very advanced users and only manually.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |