From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: KVM call agenda for Jan 26 Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:42:30 -0600 Message-ID: <4B5EFF56.8080207@codemonkey.ws> References: <20100126064902.GD25779@x200.localdomain> <03EA8701-C607-4B87-A6C6-1DCD3E5DCAAC@suse.de> <4B5EE9EF.6030904@codemonkey.ws> <197BDDDF-D808-4157-8270-42B72B99BE0D@suse.de> <4B5EED22.4080009@redhat.com> <4B5EF874.3080306@codemonkey.ws> <4B5EF903.1070508@redhat.com> <4B5EFAB6.4080102@codemonkey.ws> <4B5EFB7A.7010709@redhat.com> <4B5EFD18.1030008@codemonkey.ws> <4B5EFE13.1070300@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Alexander Graf , Chris Wright , kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mail-yw0-f176.google.com ([209.85.211.176]:60057 "EHLO mail-yw0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751938Ab0AZOmd (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:42:33 -0500 Received: by ywh6 with SMTP id 6so4070113ywh.4 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 06:42:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B5EFE13.1070300@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01/26/2010 08:37 AM, Avi Kivity wrote: > People who use discovery tools are probably setting up a migration > cluster. They aren't going to use -cpu host. BTW, it might be neat to introduce a qemu command line that runs a monitor command and exits without creating a VM. We could then introduce a info cpucap command that dumped all of the supported CPU features. Someone setting up a migration cluster would then run qemu -monitor command="info cpucap", collect the results, compute an intersection, and then use that to generate a -cpu flag. In fact, providing a tool that parsed a bunch of those outputs and generated a -cpu flag would be a pretty nice addition. >> >> Oh, I was under the impression that the tool was meant to be software >> agnostic. IOW, here are all the virt features your hardware supports. > > That's /proc/cpuinfo, we should just extend it, maybe that's what Alex > meant, but I'd like to see something more capable. I definitely think extending /proc/cpuinfo or introducing a /proc/virtinfo would be a good idea regardless of any tool we introduce. Regards, Anthony Liguori