From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kvm: Enable -cpu option to hide KVM Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 17:55:12 +0200 Message-ID: <538C9E60.4040501@redhat.com> References: <20140601162414.28708.22775.stgit@bling.home> <538C52AF.4010105@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <1401715821.9207.20.camel@ul30vt.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Alex Williamson , Michael Tokarev Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f46.google.com ([74.125.82.46]:60432 "EHLO mail-wg0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752292AbaFBPzT (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2014 11:55:19 -0400 Received: by mail-wg0-f46.google.com with SMTP id n12so5267155wgh.17 for ; Mon, 02 Jun 2014 08:55:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1401715821.9207.20.camel@ul30vt.home> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Il 02/06/2014 15:30, Alex Williamson ha scritto: > Then they'll be pissing off more users and driving them to AMD by doing > so. In any case, having the ability to hide the hypervisor seems to > stand on it's own. What if we want to test whether a guest behavior is > the result of a paravirtual interface? What if a user wants to hide the > hypervisor in order to further reduce the exposure surface to the VM? > There are reasons beyond an arms race with Nvidia to want a feature like > this. Thanks, I totally agree with you. This doesn't mean that nVidia doesn't deserve some bad press for starting this kind of arms race, of course. :) Paolo