From: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
lvivier@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
mreitz@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] accel: default to an actually available accelerator
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 15:15:59 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170922181559.GL21016@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <366021b7-c3f2-6be5-7b2d-d02ab8a8e793@redhat.com>
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 01:51:54PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 07/09/2017 10:11, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > Am 06.09.2017 um 13:29 hat Cornelia Huck geschrieben:
> >> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 11:49:27 +0200
> >> Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> configure_accelerator() falls back to tcg if no accelerator has
> >>> been specified. Formerly, we could be sure that tcg is always
> >>> available; however, with --disable-tcg, this is not longer true,
> >>> and you are not able to start qemu without explicitly specifying
> >>> another accelerator on those builds.
> >>>
> >>> Instead, choose an accelerator in the order tcg->kvm->xen->hax.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>
> >>> RFC mainly because this breaks iotest 186 in a different way on a
> >>> tcg-less x86_64 build: Before, it fails with "-machine accel=tcg: No
> >>> accelerator found"; afterwards, there seems to be a difference in
> >>> output due to different autogenerated devices. Not sure how to handle
> >>> that.
> >>>
> >>> cc:ing some hopefully interested folks (-ENOMAINTAINER again).
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> accel/accel.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>> arch_init.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> >>> include/sysemu/arch_init.h | 2 ++
> >>> qemu-options.hx | 6 ++++--
> >>> 4 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/accel/accel.c b/accel/accel.c
> >>> index 8ae40e1e13..26a3f32627 100644
> >>> --- a/accel/accel.c
> >>> +++ b/accel/accel.c
> >>> @@ -68,6 +68,25 @@ static int accel_init_machine(AccelClass *acc, MachineState *ms)
> >>> return ret;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> +static const char *default_accelerator(void)
> >>> +{
> >>> + if (tcg_available()) {
> >>> + return "tcg";
> >>> + }
> >>> + if (kvm_available()) {
> >>> + return "kvm";
> >>> + }
> >>> + if (xen_available()) {
> >>> + return "xen";
> >>> + }
> >>> + if (hax_available()) {
> >>> + return "hax";
> >>> + }
> >>> + /* configure makes sure we have at least one accelerator */
> >>> + g_assert(false);
> >>> + return "";
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> void configure_accelerator(MachineState *ms)
> >>> {
> >>> const char *accel, *p;
> >>> @@ -79,8 +98,7 @@ void configure_accelerator(MachineState *ms)
> >>>
> >>> accel = qemu_opt_get(qemu_get_machine_opts(), "accel");
> >>> if (accel == NULL) {
> >>> - /* Use the default "accelerator", tcg */
> >>> - accel = "tcg";
> >>> + accel = default_accelerator();
> >>
> >> It actually may be easier to just switch the default to
> >> "tcg:kvm:xen:hax". Haven't tested that, though.
> >
> > This would have been my first thought and looks a bit simpler, so if
> > it works, I'd go for it.
> >
> > But the real reason why I'm replying: Should we add changing the default
> > to "kvm:tcg" to the list of planned 3.0 changes? I am part of the group
> > that intentionally uses TCG occasionally, but I think the majority of
> > users wants to use KVM (or whatever the fastest option is on their
> > system) whenever it is available.
>
> Yes, the only thing to be clarified is the default family/model/stepping
> for "-accel kvm". "-cpu qemu64" with KVM uses an AMD f/m/s and Intel as
> the vendor, and some software (IIRC the GMP testsuite or something like
> that) doesn't like it. We should probably change qemu64 to a core2
> f/m/s or something like that when running under KVM. Eduardo?
The current f/m/s was supposed to make sense for both AMD and
Intel CPUs, to avoid requiring per-cpu-vendor defaults. If we
find a more recent f/m/s combination that still makes some sense
for both vendors, changing it will be very simple.
Long term, however, we should probably add per-cpu-vendor
defaults to make this more flexible.
--
Eduardo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-22 18:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-06 9:49 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] accel: default to an actually available accelerator Cornelia Huck
2017-09-06 11:29 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-09-06 14:35 ` Peter Maydell
2017-09-06 15:54 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-09-11 11:48 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-09-11 11:51 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-09-11 11:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-09-07 8:11 ` Kevin Wolf
2017-09-07 8:14 ` Thomas Huth
2017-09-07 8:25 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-09-07 8:45 ` Kevin Wolf
2017-09-11 11:51 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-09-22 18:15 ` Eduardo Habkost [this message]
2017-09-06 14:04 ` Richard Henderson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170922181559.GL21016@localhost.localdomain \
--to=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=lvivier@redhat.com \
--cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.