From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: expose host CPU features to guests Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:53:36 +0100 Message-ID: <20070910165336.GA1825@mail.shareable.org> References: <20070905174530.GA3945@karma.qumranet.com> <200709091625.59859.paul@codesourcery.com> <46E4114C.6090804@qumranet.com> <200709091712.15743.paul@codesourcery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel To: qemu-devel-qX2TKyscuCcdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200709091712.15743.paul-qD8j1LwMmJjtCj0u4l0SBw@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Paul Brook wrote: > > > What you really want to do is ask your virtualization module what > > > features it supports. > > > > Yes, that needs to be an additional filter. > > I'd have thought that would be the *only* interesting set for autodetection. If that means the same as the features which are efficient for the guest, then I agree. If there's a difference, I'd have thought you'd normally want the guest to use only those features which work at near-native performance, not those which involve a trap and long path through the virtualisation/emulation, even if they're supported. No example comes to mind, but that seems like the principle to go for, to me. -- Jamie ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/