From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NMN5R-0001dX-Rc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 09:48:46 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NMN5M-0001S7-16
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 09:48:45 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47870 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NMN5L-0001S1-R7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 09:48:39 -0500
Received: from mail-yw0-f171.google.com ([209.85.211.171]:58442)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1NMN5L-0005yl-D1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 09:48:39 -0500
Received: by ywh1 with SMTP id 1so4183715ywh.18
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 06:48:38 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4B2E3943.9020802@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 08:48:35 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] cpuid problem in upstream qemu with kvm
References: <20091214193541.GA6150@redhat.com> <4B269596.1050103@codemonkey.ws>
	<20091214194432.GC6150@redhat.com> <4B2698A9.9090107@codemonkey.ws>
	<20091214200002.GA27769@redhat.com>
	<4B2699BB.1090302@codemonkey.ws> <20091214201049.GD6150@redhat.com>
	<4B269D99.8080404@codemonkey.ws> <4B2DF334.6030208@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B2DF334.6030208@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>

Avi Kivity wrote:
>
> Maybe we should make -cpu host the default.  That will give the best 
> performance for casual users, more testing for newer features, and 
> will force management apps to treat migration much more seriously.  
> The downside is that casual users upgrading their machines might 
> experience issues with Windows.  Feature compatibility is not just 
> about migration.

Yes, I'd much rather do this than mucking with vendor_id.  If we're 
going to give up on cross vendor migration by default, I think we should 
go for best performance.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori