Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu-kvm upstreaming: Do we want -kvm-shadow-memory semantics?

[Avi Kivity]

On 01/25/2012 01:57 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > 
> > -kvm-shadow-memory is becoming less meaningful for ordinary workloads
> > since everything uses TDP these days.  It's still meaningful for testing
> > (forcing aggressive cache replacement), or perhaps nested virtualization.
>
> So, is it used for testing in fact? 

It is not, but it should be.  There's an extra_params option in
autotest, I'll start using it to stress the mmu some more, even though
it's going to slow things down for me.

> Would a machine option
> "kvm_shadow_memory=n" be desirable?

Not sure, this is a host option, not a guest option.  Machine options
should be guest-visible.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function