From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: KVM Processor cache size Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 17:22:10 -0500 Message-ID: <4C574512.6030903@codemonkey.ws> References: <4C56BF6F.9040402@amd.com> <4C56C353.7020607@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andre Przywara , Ricardo Martins , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mail-iw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:41585 "EHLO mail-iw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750957Ab0HBWWO (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Aug 2010 18:22:14 -0400 Received: by iwn7 with SMTP id 7so4467225iwn.19 for ; Mon, 02 Aug 2010 15:22:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C56C353.7020607@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 08/02/2010 08:08 AM, Avi Kivity wrote: >> I sent a patch to include the cache size when using -cpu host, but >> this has been n'acked because the benefit is not clear. > > > Anthony, why was this NACKed? I didn't NACK it. My concern is that we're still not handling live migration with -cpu host in any meaningful way. Exposing more details without addressing live migration is going to increase the likelihood of major failure. We need to add cpuid information to live migration such that we can generate a graceful failure during migration. Really, we shouldn't have taken -cpu host in the first place without this. Regards, Anthony Liguori > First, there are programs which query the cache size. That's why > it's exposed! Second, -cpu host is for exposing as many host cpu > features as we can, not just those we have an immediate use for. It's > like 'cp -a' dropping attributes the author didn't care about. >