[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [libvirt] [PATCH v1] qemu: command: rework cpu feature
Re: [Qemu-devel] [libvirt] [PATCH v1] qemu: command: rework cpu feature argument support
Wed, 16 Nov 2016 12:05:37 -0200
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 02:15:02PM +0100, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:44:00 -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > CCing qemu-devel.
> > CCing Markus, in case he has any insights about the interface
> > introspection.
> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 08:42:12AM +0100, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 18:02:29 -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 02:26:03PM -0500, Collin L. Walling wrote:
> > > > > cpu features are passed to the qemu command with feature=on/off
> > > > > instead of +/-feature.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Collin L. Walling <address@hidden>
> > > >
> > > > If I'm not mistaken, the "feature=on|off" syntax was added on
> > > > QEMU 2.0.0. Does current libvirt support older QEMU versions?
> > >
> > > Of course it does. I'd love to switch to feature=on|off, but how can we
> > > check if QEMU supports it? We can't really start using this syntax
> > > without it.
> > Actually, I was wrong, this was added in v2.4.0. "feat=on|off"
> > needs two things to work (in x86):
> > * Translation of all "foo=bar" options to QOM property setting.
> > This was added in v2.0.0-rc0~162^2
> > * The actual QOM properties for feature names to be present. They
> > were added in v2.4.0-rc0~101^2~1
> > So you can be sure "feat=on" is supported by checking if the
> > feature flags are present in device-list-properties output for
> > the CPU model. But device-list-properties is also messy.
> > Maybe we can use the availability of query-cpu-model-expansion to
> > check if we can safely use the new "feat=on|off" system? It's
> > easier than taking all the variables above into account.
> Yeah, this could work since s390 already supports
> query-cpu-model-expansion. It would cause feature=on|off not to be used
> on x86_64 with QEMU older than 2.9.0, but I guess that's not a big deal,
> is it?
Not a problem, as we have no plans to remove +feat/-feat support
in x86 anymore.