From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MxgW0-0008J0-Lz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:30:08 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MxgVw-0008E6-2y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:30:08 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36645 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MxgVv-0008E1-S6
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:30:03 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53128)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <glommer@redhat.com>) id 1MxgVv-0007Lw-2F
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:30:03 -0400
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:29:55 -0300
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] save kvm-specific msrs over save/load
Message-ID: <20091013122955.GA8092@mothafucka.localdomain>
References: <1254940513-7180-1-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com>
	<4AD33B73.3020808@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4AD33B73.3020808@codemonkey.ws>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 09:21:39AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Glauber Costa wrote:
>> Although we currently do not register a pvclock, there is no harm in saving the
>> values of the involved msrs. We'll just load an empty value. qemu-kvm, OTOH,
>> will make the correct use of it, so I think it is better to do it here, than
>> to augment the diff.
>>   
>
> How does the cpu versioning match up with qemu-kvm?
>
> Has this gone into the qemu-kvm tree yet?
No. I opted by sendind it here first.

I can do the very opposite, however, if you prefer. Just let me know.

>
> We've already bumped the version once for the 0.12 release so it's not  
> necessary to bump it again.
okay.