On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 16:53:37 +0200, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:43:23PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote: > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 13:08:51 +0200, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote: > > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 10:39:23AM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote: > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > tools/virsh.pod | 8 +++++++- > > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > [...] > > > > > +Moreover, for some architectures libvirt does not know any CPU models and > > > > +the usable CPU models are only limited by the hypervisor. > > > > > > Wonder if it is worth adding a small example for the above. > > > > An example for what exactly? > > I meant an example of a usable CPU model that libvirt doesn't know for > the said architecture(s). Maybe it's not worth it; not quite sure. The usable models are all models accepted by hypervisor for that architecture. So, e.g., libvirt won't list any CPU model for aarch64 when you call "virsh cpu-models aarch64", it will just print "all CPU models are accepted" and "virsh domcapabilities --arch aarch64" will show a very long list of CPU models libvirt would actually accept. Similarly for s390x. Jirka -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
