Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 08/02/2010 08:08 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/02/2010 03:51 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
I sent a patch to include the cache size when using -cpu host, but
this has been n'acked because the benefit is not clear.
Anthony, why was this NACKed? First, there are programs which query
the cache size. That's why it's exposed! Second, -cpu host is for
exposing as many host cpu features as we can, not just those we have
an immediate use for. It's like 'cp -a' dropping attributes the
author didn't care about.
That's exactly what the code does today BTW. The kernel module filters
cpuid flags, qemu filters additional flags, and we don't pass everything
through anyway.
-cpu host is a mess and needs some love.
The mentioned patch addresses this to some degree, where it creates a
list of CPUID leafs which can be safely passed through. There are some
which we should not (and sometimes must not) propagate (think of host
topology and power management), but these should not block the useful
ones. CPUID transports a lot of different information, so we should also
distinguish here.
It's impossible to use
correctly today in a production environment if you care about reliably
generating the same guest visible interface.
Do you mean by this that the guest sees a different CPU model on each
host it is started? Actually this is a default scenario for native
machines and CPUID was introduced for applications to adapt to this.
So if you leave migration aside, -cpu host is actually the natural way.
Regards,
Andre.
--
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 488-3567-12
--
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
