From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for October 25 Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 08:05:31 -0500 Message-ID: <4EA6B41B.3000903@codemonkey.ws> References: <4EA6ACFE.6090109@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Paolo Bonzini , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Kevin Wolf Return-path: Received: from mail-gx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.161.174]:43317 "EHLO mail-gx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933213Ab1JYNFe (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Oct 2011 09:05:34 -0400 Received: by ggnb1 with SMTP id b1so451132ggn.19 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 06:05:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4EA6ACFE.6090109@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 10/25/2011 07:35 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 24.10.2011 13:35, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: >> On 10/24/2011 01:04 PM, Juan Quintela wrote: >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> Please send in any agenda items you are interested in covering. >> >> - What's left to merge for 1.0. > > I would still like to cache the default cache mode (probably to > cache=writeback). We don't allow guests to toggle WCE yet which Anthony > would have liked to see before doing the change. Is it a strict requirement? I don't see a way around it. If the default mode is cache=writeback, then we're open to data corruption in any guest where barrier=0. With guest togglable WCE, it ends up being a guest configuration issue so we can more or less defer responsibility. Do you think it's a good idea to change the default mode w/o guest WCE toggle support? What's your view about older guests if we change the default mode? What's your main motivation for wanting to change the default mode? I'd be much more open to changing the default mode to cache=none FWIW since the risk of data loss there is much, much lower. Regards, Anthony Liguori > > Kevin >