From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: CPU hotplug add seems broken Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 12:23:05 +0200 Message-ID: <4B4AFC09.3090909@redhat.com> References: <5e93dcec1001080235r6b3de506q8b2ba132fa1ff52c@mail.gmail.com> <20100109193011.GA25426@defiant.freesoftware> <20100110063911.GG4905@redhat.com> <5e93dcec1001100033tdb930eqcaf48a36ee36b335@mail.gmail.com> <20100110084353.GI4905@redhat.com> <5e93dcec1001110124l38d35ef7y4e92aa8b74aa810a@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Gleb Natapov , dbareiro@gmx.net, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Ryota Ozaki Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37843 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750959Ab0AKKXK (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 05:23:10 -0500 In-Reply-To: <5e93dcec1001110124l38d35ef7y4e92aa8b74aa810a@mail.gmail.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01/11/2010 11:24 AM, Ryota Ozaki wrote: > >> The problem is that there is no standard >> way to hotplug CPUs in a PC. Linux implements the way UNISYS happen to do >> it, but no other system do it like that. Windows implements it >> differently and in the way that conflicts with Linux, so you can't >> have working Linux implementation and pass Microsoft SVVP test at the >> same time for instance. >> > Could I ask you what's the difference between the two implementations? > Don't we have a possibility to have different implementations in qemu-kvm > (and SeaBIOS)? > IMO we should stick with the unisys-derived implementation, port it to SeaBIOS, and write a Windows driver for it. It has the advantage of having support in Linux, and of being somewhat tested. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function