From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] qemu-kvm-0.13.0-rc1 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 08:11:00 +0200 Message-ID: <4C8C6EF4.9020906@redhat.com> References: <20100908162918.GA27948@amt.cnet> <4C87EC78.9030800@xutrox.com> <4C87F302.7050702@codemonkey.ws> <4C887C12.2060701@redhat.com> <4C88DA62.4050304@codemonkey.ws> <4C8A1ACD.6090903@redhat.com> <20100910193101.GB23988@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <4C8A8B8E.6060806@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Chris Wright , Arjan Koers <0h61vkll2ly8@xutrox.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Anthony Liguori Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:6704 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751464Ab0ILGLM (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Sep 2010 02:11:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C8A8B8E.6060806@codemonkey.ws> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 09/10/2010 10:48 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> I agree, is there any reason not to enable compiling less into the >> binary? >> There are folks interested in eliminating as much as possible to reduce >> the attack surface and auditing requirements, for example. > > It's not a bad idea, it's just that what --disable-cpu-emulation does > is evil. Being that I wrote the implementation, I'm quite confident > in declare it as such :-) > Oh, I thought you were against the idea in itself for some reason. I'll patch it for 0.13, but any ideas on how it should be rework for master? -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain.