Re: KVM Processor cache size

[Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@amd.com>]

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> 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.
You are right. I am sorry if that created a misunderstanding, I actually 
meant: "was not committed".
> 
> 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.
Would you accept a patch simply disabling migration in case -cpu host 
was used in the first place?
> 
> 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.
Is there already a way to communicate from the target to the source? 
This would allow to check for migrate-ability before we transfer any 
data. Or should we handle this in a management application?

Regards,
Andre.

-- 
Andre Przywara
AMD-Operating System Research Center (OSRC), Dresden, Germany
Tel: +49 351 488-3567-12