Re: Test result for KVM, kernel 62d1ea7.. , userspace 667f2deff8..

[Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>]

Farkas Levente wrote:
> hi,
> it seems we've got a real tester:-) for ma all of the bellow are serious
> bugs (tomorrow i'll try to send more detail of our host crash too) and
> imho the latest 'stable' version was kvm-36. wouldn't be better to
> postpone all patches and infrastructure changes (virtio and others)
> until these have been fixed and try to produce a new 'stable' release?
> i understand then everybody (including myself) would like to see these
> new features in the latest and greatest kvm release, but at the same
> time i'd be nice to think about the end users too.
> may some version cane be labeled as stable (eg 36) and the latest as
> devel. this can help a lot for those who are not read this list.
>   

You can use -no-kvm-irqchip to get stability similar to kvm-36.

Stopping vitrio development will not get the other issues fixed.


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


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/