From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MOV2o-0002ow-TC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Jul 2009 07:10:34 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MOV2k-0002nd-8A for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Jul 2009 07:10:34 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41804 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MOV2k-0002na-35 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Jul 2009 07:10:30 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:36282) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MOV2h-0003FI-41 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Jul 2009 07:10:27 -0400 Message-ID: <4A547E5A.7050404@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:09:14 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qemu-iotests: look for qemu-iotests-$ARCH References: <20090707180346.GA6233@lst.de> <4A545A1B.1080606@redhat.com> <20090708105915.GA14142@lst.de> In-Reply-To: <20090708105915.GA14142@lst.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Christoph Hellwig schrieb: > On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 10:34:35AM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: >> Christoph Hellwig schrieb: >>> Look for the binary as installed by qemu make install instead of >>> requiring the qemu symlink. Note that we need a couple of regular >>> expressions to munge the uname output into the architecture name >>> qemu expects. >> I don't completely understand your goal here. Why would you want to use >> the host architecture for the guest, too? If anything this makes tests >> behave differently on different hosts. If, say, qemu-system-x86_64 is >> available depends on the configure options rather than on the host. And >> qemu isn't a symlink AFAIK, but the traditional name of qemu-system-i386 >> (or has this changed recently?). > > I did this from the kvm point of view where normally host equals guest > (modulo differences like i386 vs x86_64). In my installation qemu was a > symlink, not sure if this was the original or if I did it manually at > some point. I'm not sure that the KVM point of view really matters here. I can see two possible use cases for qemu: Either we just start it up without a guest OS to do things like a simple savevm, then TCG is just as good. Or we boot up a guest OS, then we obviously need the architecture matching the guest, not the host. > So what method of finding a suitable qemu binary do you suggest instead? > I'm pretty open for doing anything that works. Maybe something like trying qemu-system-x86_64, then qemu-kvm, then qemu? We could use i386 guests on every host then. If it's accelerated with KVM, kqemu or not at all doesn't really matter. Kevin