On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 04:23:18PM -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote: > On 02/26/2018 04:10 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 03:47:11PM -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote: > > > On 02/08/2018 03:58 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > > > > + > > > > +# Nested HVM global control. In order to use nested HVM feature, this option > > > > +# needs to be enabled, in addition to specifying <cpu mode='host-passthrough'> > > > > +# in domain configuration. > > > > +# By default it is disabled. > > > > +#nested_hvm = 0 > > > > > > I think per-domain settings should override this one. Users would find it > > > odd that they don't have vmx in their hvm guest with > > > > > > <cpu mode='host-passthrough'> > > > <feature policy='require' name='vmx'/> > > > </cpu> > > > > I like this one :) It means that by just introducing global > > "nested_hvm = 0", we can have what I've originally proposed - nested HVM > > disabled until explicitly enabled with exactly this config snippet. > > Yes. Sorry if we've been going around in circles on some of these topics. Ok, so before I go with v5 being mainly revert to v3 (+global config), can you confirm that it is really ok? Will it be consistent enough with KVM case? Not sure how it's handled there, but I'd guess if _kernel module_ parameter is set to 0 (is it where the global switch is?), it will stay disabled regardless of what you specify in libvirt domain XML. -- Best Regards, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki Invisible Things Lab A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
