On 01/19/2012 07:39 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-01-19 18:28, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 01:46:39PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> Hi again, > >> > >> do we need some KVM knob comparable to qemu-kvm's -kvm-shadow-memory in > >> upstream? > >> > >> If yes: The underlying IOCTL is x86-only. Are other archs interested in > >> this long-term as well, ie. should the control become arch-independent? > >> > >> Jan > > > > Last time i asked about removal, Avi wished for it to remain. > > > > Then I guess he should comment on this after returning to work. :) -kvm-shadow-memory is becoming less meaningful for ordinary workloads since everything uses TDP these days. It's still meaningful for testing (forcing aggressive cache replacement), or perhaps nested virtualization. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- 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
