On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 05:28:27PM -0400, Jim Paris wrote: > Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 09:46:17AM -0400, Jim Paris wrote: > > > Speaking of this, I've noticed that > > > > > > <domain type='qemu'> > > > <os> > > > <type arch='i686' machine='pc'>hvm</type> > > > </os> > > > </domain> > > > > > > runs WITH kvm on an x86_64 system. Is that intended? > > > > No, its not intended ! > ... > > I'm actually wondering why we bother with #1 at all. If the > > binary has '-no-kvm' and the domain is 'qemu', then it should > > be used no matter what arch. > > Agreed. Below is a patch which should fix the oversight (lightly > tested). > > However, this is going to be a user-visible change and may cause > people to complain that their existing 32-bit domains are unexpectedly > running with -no-kvm. Is that OK? Technically it's a misconfiguration. > > For the record, I think we've already broken this area once when > 0.6.2 came out -- previous to that, even my 64-bit VMs had domain type > "qemu", and libvirt ran my specified kvm binary without -no-kvm. Okidoc, apllied and commited, thanks ! Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxx | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ http://veillard.com/ | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list