From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dustin Kirkland Subject: Re: KVM usability Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:32:58 -0600 Message-ID: <1268145178.2251.12.camel@x200> References: <1267068445.1726.25.camel@localhost> <1267089644.12790.74.camel@laptop> <1267152599.1726.76.camel@localhost> <20100226090147.GH15885@elte.hu> <4B879A2F.50203@redhat.com> <20100226103545.GA7463@elte.hu> <4B87A6BF.3090301@redhat.com> <20100226111734.GE7463@elte.hu> <4B8813F2.8090208@redhat.com> <20100227105643.GA17425@elte.hu> <4B8C38B8.8010007@codemonkey.ws> <62EE499D-BE5D-4014-80C7-6FB3A0A1C71E@suse.de> <4B8C799A.6000102@codemonkey.ws> <4B964DD0.4090100@redhat.com> Reply-To: kirkland@canonical.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-9kIlD/5G8TqcqHKKhiR/" Cc: Anthony Liguori , Alexander Graf , Ingo Molnar , "Zhang, Yanmin" , Peter Zijlstra , ming.m.lin@intel.com, sheng.yang@intel.com, Jes Sorensen , KVM General , Zachary Amsden , Gleb Natapov , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Fr??d??ric Weisbecker , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , Arjan van de Ven To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from adelie.canonical.com ([91.189.90.139]:59661 "EHLO adelie.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753728Ab0CIOdp (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:33:45 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B964DD0.4090100@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-9kIlD/5G8TqcqHKKhiR/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 15:32 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 03/02/2010 04:36 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> I keep a patch in the SUSE version for quite some time now that bumps=20 > >> the default to 384 for qemu-kvm. That was the first "round" number=20 > >> where an openSUSE installation worked. > > > > If someone works up a patch and tests at least a couple types of=20 > > guests to confirm that they all install with that number, I'd be happy=20 > > to apply it (although we need some trickery to support older pc=20 > > versions). >=20 > We should avoid changing defaults. I don't think in this case it=20 > matters, since everyone specifies -m anyway, but as a general rule=20 > changing defaults =3D breakage for the unwary. At least make the default= =20 > part of the machine type to preserve compatibility. In that case, Alex, where can I find your +384M patch, because I'd like to carry the same one in Ubuntu... Dustin --=-9kIlD/5G8TqcqHKKhiR/ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkuWXBoACgkQs7pNXIOmEZShFACgp3u2/67RaJV3RK4mfE4Wmtdg lNoAoLIt6SLoqoPXMOG/NtuSikUdSu9Q =CgDc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-9kIlD/5G8TqcqHKKhiR/--