From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36514 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OamRv-0003LS-DB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2010 05:15:48 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OamRu-0002u8-8g for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2010 05:15:47 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55852) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OamRt-0002tx-U9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2010 05:15:46 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 12:15:43 +0300 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Question about qemu firmware configuration (fw_cfg) device Message-ID: <20100719091543.GM4689@redhat.com> References: <20100719062356.GU4689@redhat.com> <20100719072802.GO13194@amd.home.annexia.org> <20100719073312.GY4689@redhat.com> <20100719074416.GP13194@amd.home.annexia.org> <20100719075533.GC4689@redhat.com> <20100719083411.GR13194@amd.home.annexia.org> <20100719084041.GH4689@redhat.com> <20100719090004.GS13194@amd.home.annexia.org> <20100719090654.GK4689@redhat.com> <9C4457B3-884D-482D-9BD0-C49AA20FB3CF@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9C4457B3-884D-482D-9BD0-C49AA20FB3CF@suse.de> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alexander Graf Cc: "Richard W.M. Jones" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:09:13AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 19.07.2010, at 11:06, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 10:00:04AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >> > >> virt-install is another program that uses explicit -initrd. > >> > > Installation takes a lot of time. Saving 1 second there will not be > > noticeable. And during lifetime of installed VM initrd will be loaded > > from its disk. > > Guys, please. It shouldn't be one or the other. Let's make sure both ways of doing things are fast. That's what users want: fast. > That what we are talking about, no? We are trying to find faster way to load kernel/initrd and stay architectural. Honestly I would expect much greater speedup from Richard's approach like 2 seconds vs 8 seconds. It is hard to justify code complication just for 1 second speedup. -- Gleb.