From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Raindog <raindog@macrohmasheen.com>
Subject: Re: debugging windows guests
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 23:05:35 -0800
Message-ID: <4B29D83F.2090602@macrohmasheen.com>
References: <4B26D775.90809@macrohmasheen.com> <4B281E4A.1050608@web.de> <4B2959EA.2040200@macrohmasheen.com> <4B29C341.60706@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from macrohmasheen.com ([206.123.88.147]:36993 "EHLO
	macrohmasheen.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1754821AbZLQHFt (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 17 Dec 2009 02:05:49 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4B29C341.60706@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On 12/16/2009 9:36 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 12/17/2009 12:06 AM, Raindog wrote:
>>
>> Are there any advantages over stock qemu if using kvm w/out the 
>> kernel module?
>
> No.  qemu-kvm is not tested without kvm, so there may be disadvantages.
>

Does that then imply that svm emulation (--enable-nesting) is not well 
tested either?