On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:21:34AM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> The problem here is that "requested_features" doesn't include just
> the explicit "+flag" flags, but any flag included in the CPU model
> definition. See the "-cpu n270" example below.
Oh, you mean if requested_features would contain a flag included from
the CPU model definition - a flag which we haven't requested explicitly
- and if kvm emulates that flag, then it will get enabled?
Hmm.
> It should, but your patch will make it stop failing because of MOVBE, as
> now it can be emulated[1].
Right.
> "enforce" makes sure all features are really being enabled. It makes
> QEMU abort if there's any feature that can't be enabled on that host.
Ok.
> [1] Maybe one source of confusion is that the existing code have two
> feature-filtering functions doing basically the same thing:
> filter_features_for_kvm() and kvm_check_features_against_host(). That's
Yes, and the first gets executed unconditionally and does the feature
filtering, right after the second has run in the kvm_enabled() branch.
> something we must clean up, and they should be unified. "enforce" should
> become synonymous to "make sure filtered_features is all zeroes". This
> way, libvirt can emulate what 'enforce" does while being able to collect
> detailed error information (which is not easy to do if QEMU simply
> aborts).
Ok, maybe someone who's more knowledgeable with this code should do it -
not me :)
Also, there's another aspect, while we're here: now that QEMU emulates
MOVBE with TCG too, how do we specify on the command line, which
emulation should be used - kvm.ko or QEMU?
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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
