From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] qemu-kvm: Switch to upstream -enable-kvm semantics Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2011 12:18:46 +0200 Message-ID: <4D205106.3040603@redhat.com> References: <4D205045.6000308@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Markus Armbruster , kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Daniel P. Berrange" , "Richard W. M. Jones" , Anthony Liguori To: Jan Kiszka Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:21019 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753727Ab1ABKSw (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Jan 2011 05:18:52 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4D205045.6000308@web.de> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01/02/2011 12:15 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Does any qemu-kvm user rely on the automatic fallback to TCG if KVM > initialization fails? We don't know... > If not, then just set kvm_allowed to 1 in qemu-kvm > and leave the rest as upstream provides it. This fallback is really > annoying, specifically as the only point of qemu-kvm is, well, running > over KVM. I agree, upstream's behaviour is better, and the proposed -accel is even better. But we can't just change behaviour randomly, even if it's an improvement. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function