From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: debugging windows guests Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:37:50 +0200 Message-ID: <4B29EDDE.6060608@redhat.com> References: <4B26D775.90809@macrohmasheen.com> <4B281E4A.1050608@web.de> <4B2959EA.2040200@macrohmasheen.com> <4B29C341.60706@redhat.com> <4B29D83F.2090602@macrohmasheen.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jan Kiszka , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Raindog Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:62379 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756101AbZLQIhy (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 03:37:54 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B29D83F.2090602@macrohmasheen.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/17/2009 09:05 AM, Raindog wrote: > 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? It's an unrelated feature (but I wouldn't say it is heavily tested). -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function