From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: CPU hotplug add seems broken
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:18:55 +0200
Message-ID: <20100111121855.GM7549@redhat.com>
References: <5e93dcec1001110124l38d35ef7y4e92aa8b74aa810a@mail.gmail.com>
 <4B4AFC09.3090909@redhat.com>
 <20100111102434.GG7549@redhat.com>
 <4B4AFCB0.1080706@redhat.com>
 <20100111104213.GH7549@redhat.com>
 <4B4B025D.1020309@redhat.com>
 <20100111105331.GI7549@redhat.com>
 <4B4B0450.9010904@redhat.com>
 <20100111110328.GJ7549@redhat.com>
 <4B4B0630.8010509@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Ryota Ozaki <ozaki.ryota@gmail.com>, dbareiro@gmx.net,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:17652 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751496Ab0AKMTA (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 11 Jan 2010 07:19:00 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4B4B0630.8010509@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 01:06:24PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 01/11/2010 01:03 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >
> >>No, but I'm not really worried about that.
> >>
> >So you want to introduce something that we know upset Windows without
> >looking into alternatives.
> 
> I don't want to drop support for existing guests unless I have to.
> 
Neither do I and I would be happy with what we had if SVVP wouldn't
complain. So we need some kind of fix, or exception for the test.
 
> >And as far as I remember upstream position
> >on the UNISYS way was negative, did this change?
> 
> I don't see anything fundamentally wrong with the unisys
> implementation.  True, it's not written to any spec, but neither is
> anything we can come up with (unless we find a spec for cpu
> hotplug).
> 

--
			Gleb.