On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 17:05:06 +0200 Peter Krempa <pkrempa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 11:53:22 -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > (CCing libvirt folks) > > > > BTW: > > > > On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 02:22:22PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > [...] > > > > /* Special cases: */ > > > > if (!strcmp(name, "xlevel")) { > > > > numvalue = strtoul(val, &err, 0); > > > > if (!*val || *err) { > > > > error_setg(errp, "bad numerical value %s", val); > > > > return; > > > > } > > > > if (numvalue < 0x80000000) { > > > > error_report("xlevel value shall always be >= 0x80000000" > > > > ", fixup will be removed in future versions"); > > > > numvalue += 0x80000000; > > > > snprintf(num, sizeof(num), "%" PRIu32, numvalue); > > > > val = num; > > [...] > > > > } else if (!strcmp(name, "hv-spinlocks")) { > > > > const int min = 0xFFF; > > > > > > > > numvalue = strtoul(val, &err, 0); > > > > if (!*val || *err) { > > > > error_setg(errp, "bad numerical value %s", val); > > > > return; > > > > } > > > > if (numvalue < min) { > > > > error_report("hv-spinlocks value shall always be >= 0x%x" > > > > ", fixup will be removed in future versions", > > > > min); > > > > numvalue = min; > > > > } > > > > Those "fixup will be removed in future versions" warnings are > > present since QEMU 1.7. Assuming that libvirt never allowed those > > invalid values to be used in the configuration (did it?), I > > believe we can safely remove the hv-spinlocks and xlevel fixups > > in QEMU 2.7. > > I couldn't find anything regarding xlevel (so we might actually not > support it at all), but we indeed do limit the hv_spinlock count: > > > if (def->hyperv_spinlocks < 0xFFF) { > virReportError(VIR_ERR_XML_ERROR, "%s", > _("HyperV spinlock retry count must be " > "at least 4095")); > goto error; > } > > Peter Peter, Does libvirt still uses -cpu xxx,+feat1,-feat2 syntax or canonical property syntax there feat1=on,feat2=off -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list