From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH] Account for Fedora kernels with backported vzalloc Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 12:20:43 +0300 Message-ID: <4DD38F6B.9040804@redhat.com> References: <1305644154-22027-1-git-send-email-bernhard.kohl@nsn.com> <4DD2B09C.5080208@redhat.com> <81D3255A15981A4B912531E3648B1E16049AD446@DEMUEXC005.nsn-intra.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, "Ostler, Thomas (NSN - DE/Munich)" To: "Kohl, Bernhard (NSN - DE/Munich)" Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37928 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756684Ab1ERJUx (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 May 2011 05:20:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <81D3255A15981A4B912531E3648B1E16049AD446@DEMUEXC005.nsn-intra.net> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 05/18/2011 12:11 PM, Kohl, Bernhard (NSN - DE/Munich) wrote: > > > > Curious, why are you targetting Fedora kernels at all? They have a > > really short shelf life. I though kvm-kmod was for people using > longer > > term kernels like enterprise distros or long lived embedded projects. > > Here at NSN a couple of developers and testers are using Fedora + > kvm-kmod > to run some of our systems (with in-house developed OS) on KVM. This > works > also without kvm-kmod since kernel 2.6.35 (Fedora 14). The number of > users > (which are not Linux experts at all) is growing since over a year. > Usually > I prepare and test new versions of kvm-kmod and then it's easy for these > guys to install it on their machines. So I always keep track to be > up-to-date with the upstream kvm-kmod. > > The next candidate for kvm-kmod usage here might be your patch set > "KVM in-guest performance monitoring", but I think we need a complete > kernel for this as major parts of these patches are outside KVM. Some > people here are eager for this new feature. Accidentally my colleague > Thomas started investigating the performance counter topic 2 weeks ago. > > Nevertheless I hope that kvm-kmod will live for a while. It is quite > useful for our work. Yes, I can see how it helps your workflow. I guess the only viable alternative would be to prepare a full kernel rpm, but that is a lot more work. Regarding the PMU, the patchset modifies the core perf_event code and exports some symbols. We might be able to work around these issues but this isn't certain. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function