Am 18.09.2013 um 07:05 schrieb Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 11:17:11PM -0500, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >> It means you can only choose between HV and PR machine wide, while with this patch set you give the user the flexibility to have HV and PR guests run in parallel. >> >> I know that Anthony doesn't believe it's a valid use case, but I like the flexible solution better. It does however male sense to enable a sysadmin to remove any PR functionality from the system by blocking that module. >> >> Can't we have both? > > So, one suggestion (from Aneesh) is to use the 'type' argument to > kvm_arch_init_vm() to indicate whether we want a specific type of KVM > (PR or HV), or just the default. Zero would mean default (fastest > available) whereas other values would indicate a specific choice of PR > or HV. Then, if we build separate kvm_pr and kvm_hv modules when KVM > is configured to be a module, the sysadmin can control the default > choice by loading and unloading modules. > > How does that sound? Or would you prefer to stick with a single > module and have a module option to control the default choice? I think keeping 2 modules makes a lot of sense, but I'm not sure a parameter to init_vm works well with the way we model machines in QEMU. IIRC we only know that we force anything in the machine model initialization which happens way past the vm init. Alex > > Paul. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
