Re: [PATCH] Account for Fedora kernels with backported vzalloc

[Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>]

On 05/18/2011 12:11 PM, Kohl, Bernhard (NSN - DE/Munich) wrote:
> >
> >  Curious, why are you targetting Fedora kernels at all?  They have a
> >  really short shelf life.  I though kvm-kmod was for people using
> longer
> >  term kernels like enterprise distros or long lived embedded projects.
>
> Here at NSN a couple of developers and testers are using Fedora +
> kvm-kmod
> to run some of our systems (with in-house developed OS) on KVM. This
> works
> also without kvm-kmod since kernel 2.6.35 (Fedora 14). The number of
> users
> (which are not Linux experts at all) is growing since over a year.
> Usually
> I prepare and test new versions of kvm-kmod and then it's easy for these
> guys to install it on their machines. So I always keep track to be
> up-to-date with the upstream kvm-kmod.
>
> The next candidate for kvm-kmod usage here might be your patch set
> "KVM in-guest performance monitoring", but I think we need a complete
> kernel for this as major parts of these patches are outside KVM. Some
> people here are eager for this new feature. Accidentally my colleague
> Thomas started investigating the performance counter topic 2 weeks ago.
>
> Nevertheless I hope that kvm-kmod will live for a while. It is quite
> useful for our work.

Yes, I can see how it helps your workflow.  I guess the only viable 
alternative would be to prepare a full kernel rpm, but that is a lot 
more work.

Regarding the PMU, the patchset modifies the core perf_event code and 
exports some symbols.  We might be able to work around these issues but 
this isn't certain.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function