From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Lieven Subject: Re: Live Migration of 32-bit Linux guest broken since 2.6.35-rc2 Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 10:29:33 +0200 Message-ID: <4C0F50ED.7060109@dlh.net> References: <215BBDE4-B30E-4E55-8AC7-3B7C25662FAC@dlh.net> <4C0E09C0.9060300@dlh.net> <4C0E29B6.7060302@redhat.com> <4C0E2A1E.6080609@redhat.com> <4C0E2ECC.5090806@redhat.com> <4C0E3C46.30901@dlh.net> <4C0E3CD5.4070202@redhat.com> <4C0E4576.8030609@dlh.net> <4C0E46ED.5030305@redhat.com> <4C0E47C3.1050409@dlh.net> <4C0E484D.4060609@redhat.com> <4C0E492F.6060203@dlh.net> <4C0E495C.8020008@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from zion.dlh.net ([91.198.192.1]:53616 "EHLO mail.dlh.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752986Ab0FII3r (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jun 2010 04:29:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C0E495C.8020008@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Avi Kivity wrote: > On 06/08/2010 04:44 PM, Peter Lieven wrote: >>> -cpu host is good if you have identical machines and don't plan to >>> add new ones. >> >> i will likely add new ones, but my plan would be to use qemu64 and >> then add all flags manually that >> are common to all cpus in the pool. >> would that be safe? > > Yes. > 2 last questions: a) i remember that there (have been) are instructions that have a high virtualization penalty. are there flags that should better not be offered to a VM? b) you told you fixed another bug in 2.6.35. is the nx virtualization not working in guests before 2.6.35 and therefore my case worked with 2.6.34? thanks peter