On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 01:41:18PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-03-22 08:18, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 02:49:09PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> On 2012-03-21 14:41, Gleb Natapov wrote: > >>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 02:39:47PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >>>> On 2012-03-21 14:36, Avi Kivity wrote: > >>>>> On 03/21/2012 02:36 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >>>>>> This is now implied by kvm_irqchip_in_kernel. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> So we can't have -no-kvm-pit? > >>>>> > >>>>> No huge loss, but unexpected. > >>>> > >>>> See e81dda195556e72f8cd294998296c1051aab30a8. > >>>> > >>> I am curious what is the reason for upstream to not supporting disabling the > >>> in-kernel PIT separately? > >> > >> It was considered no longer relevant: > >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.kvm.devel/85393 > >> > > Hmm, may be we should think about this some more. If in the (not so far) > > future we want to drop pit emulation from the kernel we may want to support > > -no-kvm-pit to allow migration from old kernels to new one. > > That's not an issue. Both device models are compatible, and you can > migrate between kernel_irqchip=on/off theses days with QEMU. > Cool. Including PIT lost tick compensation? -- Gleb. -- 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
