* Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Consider the _other_ examples that are a lot more clear: > > > > ' If you expose paravirt spilocks via KVM please also make sure the KVM > > tooling can make use of it, has an option for it to configure it, and > > that it has sufficient efficiency statistics displayed in the tool for > > admins to monitor.' > > > > ' If you create this new paravirt driver then please also make sure it can > > be configured in the tooling. ' > > > > ' Please also add a testcase for this bug to tools/kvm/testcases/ so we dont > > repeat this same mistake in the future. ' > > All three happen quite commonly in qemu/kvm development. Of course someone > who develops a feature also develops a patch that exposes it in qemu. There > are several test cases in qemu-kvm.git/kvm/user/test. If that is the theory then it has failed to trickle through in practice. As you know i have reported a long list of usability problems with hardly a look. That list could be created by pretty much anyone spending a few minutes of getting a first impression with qemu-kvm. So something is seriously wrong in KVM land, to pretty much anyone trying it for the first time. I have explained how i see the root cause of that, while you seem to suggest that there's nothing wrong to begin with. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
