From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>,
"Richard W. M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] qemu-kvm: Switch to upstream -enable-kvm semantics
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 18:57:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m339pyyl59.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D08FB7D.2010702@codemonkey.ws> (Anthony Liguori's message of "Wed, 15 Dec 2010 11:31:41 -0600")
Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> writes:
> On 12/15/2010 09:50 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> We currently enable KVM by default, and when it's not available, we
>> print a message and fall back to TCG. Option -enable-kvm is ignored.
>> Option -no-kvm suppresses KVM.
>>
>> Upstream works differently: KVM is off by default, -enable-kvm
>> switches it on. -enable-kvm terminates the process unsuccessfully if
>> KVM is not available.
>>
>> upstream qemu | default |-enable-kvm
>> ----------------+-----------+-----------
>> KVM available | disabled | enabled
>> KVM unavailable | disabled | fail
>>
>> qemu-kvm | default |-enable-kvm
>> ----------------+-----------+-----------
>> KVM available | enabled* | enabled
>> KVM unavailable | disabled | disabled*
>>
>> * differs from upstream
>>
>> Users of qemu and qemu-kvm need to be aware of these differences to
>> enable / disable use of KVM reliably. This is bothersome.
>>
>> Consider -enable-kvm when KVM is unavailable: If the user expects
>> qemu-kvm behavior (fall back), but qemu fails, he'll likely be
>> surprised and unhappy. If the user expects upstream behavior (fail),
>> but qemu-kvm falls back to TCG, the guest runs slow as molasses, and
>> the user will likely be confused and unhappy (unless he spots and
>> understands the "disable KVM" message).
>>
>> Switch to upstream semantics: KVM off by default, -enable-kvm switches
>> it on, and when it can't, it's fatal.
>>
>> Having to enable KVM explicitly is annoying, but the proper place to
>> address that is upstream.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster<armbru@redhat.com>
>>
>
> Backwards compatibility is going to kill us if we try to make this change.
>
> Current qemu-kvm behavior:
>
> default: -accel kvm,tcg
> -no-kvm: -accel tcg
> -enable-kvm: -accel kvm,tcg
>
> Current upstream behavior
>
> default: -accel tcg
> -enable-kvm: -accel kvm
>
> I think we should tie `-accel' to the machine type. For qemu-kvm, a
> different default machine type should be used than upstream qemu (it
> really should be a configure switch).
>
> For `pc', the default `-accel' behavior should remain 'tcg'. For
> kvmpc', the default `-accel' behavior should be 'kvm,tcg'.
>
> -no-kvm should be deprecated. -enable-kvm should also be deprecated
> in favor of the `-accel' option.
I'm fine with -accel and deprecating the old options. But until we have
that:
> In the short term, it would be a good idea to modify qemu-kvm to
> switch the -enable-kvm semantics to match upstream (fail if KVM isn't
> available).
That's what my patch does.
Additionally, it changes the default to match upstream: KVM disabled.
What do you want changed in my patch?
> Adding an alias for 'kvmpc' upstream and qemu-kvm and
> making qemu-kvm default to 'kvmpc' would be helpful for management
> tools too.
That would address "Having to enable KVM explicitly is annoying".
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-15 17:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-15 15:50 [PATCH] qemu-kvm: Switch to upstream -enable-kvm semantics Markus Armbruster
2010-12-15 17:31 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-12-15 17:57 ` Markus Armbruster [this message]
2010-12-21 15:16 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-21 15:41 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-12-21 15:48 ` Avi Kivity
2010-12-21 16:05 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-12-21 16:00 ` Richard W.M. Jones
2010-12-21 16:02 ` Richard W.M. Jones
2010-12-21 16:07 ` Markus Armbruster
2010-12-21 16:56 ` [Qemu-devel] " Anthony Liguori
2010-12-21 17:25 ` Alexander Graf
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m339pyyl59.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org \
--to=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=rjones@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox