Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu-kvm upstreaming: Do we want -kvm-shadow-memory semantics?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 01/25/2012 02:10 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > 
> >> Would a machine option
> >> "kvm_shadow_memory=n" be desirable?
> > 
> > Not sure, this is a host option, not a guest option.  Machine options
> > should be guest-visible.
>
> machine options are not guest visible. Basically, this options falls
> into the same category as kernel_irqchip.

They should be.  We should work hard to separate the guest ABI from
everything else.  Same as kvm-apic appearing in the qdev name.

> Do we have alternatives? A top-level command line options is surely none.

  -kvm shadow-memory=n,...

  -accel kvm,shadow-memory=n,...

-- 
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


[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux