On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 04:26:58PM -0400, Don Slutz wrote: > On 09/21/12 10:18, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 04:06:27PM -0400, Don Slutz wrote: > >> From http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1205.0/00100.html > >>EAX should be KVM_CPUID_FEATURES (0x40000001) not 0. > >> > >>Added hypervisor-vendor=kvm0 to get the older CPUID result. kvm1 selects the newer one. > >Why not just make "hypervisor-vendor=kvm" control only the hypervisor > >vendor string, and support something like "kvm-hypervisor-level=0" to > >restore the old cpuid_hv_level=0 behavior? > -cpu host,hypervisor-vendor=kvm,hypervisor-level=0 > > Does this. Good. :-) > > > >This is similar to the kvmclock case: it would allow us to make > >"hypervisor-vendor=kvm" use saner values as default, but letting old > >machine-types to override it for compatibility if required. > Right now since I am using env->cpuid_hv_level == 0 as a flag. This > means that: > > -cpu host,hypervisor-level=0,hypervisor-vendor=kvm > > -cpu host,hypervisor-vendor=kvm,hypervisor-level=0 > > end up with different CPUID data (Which I do not like). I will fix this in the next round. Right. This has to be fixed. > > Did you want me to drop kvm0 and kvm1? Yes, if level is already configurable using the hypervisor-level property, I don't see the need for kvm0 and kvm1. If you make kvm_arch_init_vcpu() actually use those fields, you will end up implementing what's required to allow migration compatibility to be kept (the only thing missing is to make the CPU class a child of DeviceState, and add hypervisor-level=0 to the existing machine-types). :-) -- Eduardo -- 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
