From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55163) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YL85C-0006WD-4C for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 05:30:22 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YL858-00055q-Id for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 05:30:18 -0500 Received: from mx-v6.kamp.de ([2a02:248:0:51::16]:58783 helo=mx01.kamp.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YL858-000551-6L for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 05:30:14 -0500 Message-ID: <54D9DDAF.2050200@kamp.de> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 11:30:07 +0100 From: Peter Lieven MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <54D9CEC9.9040902@kamp.de> <54D9D421.10907@redhat.com> <54D9D765.4040805@kamp.de> <54D9DACD.9020704@redhat.com> <54D9DC74.1020502@kamp.de> <54D9DCB0.8030407@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <54D9DCB0.8030407@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] kvmclock_current_nsec: Assertion `time.tsc_timestamp <= migration_tsc' List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" Cc: mtosatti@redhat.com, agraf@suse.de Am 10.02.2015 um 11:25 schrieb Paolo Bonzini: > > On 10/02/2015 11:24, Peter Lieven wrote: >>> First of all (but unrelated to the bug) do not use "-cpu qemu64" with >>> KVM. >> I remember there was an issue with kvm64 anytime in the past, but this >> is ages ago I think. I will change that for new vserver starts. What >> (which flag) is the exact issue with qemu64 vs. kvm64 > QEMU64 does not resemble any actual processor. You want the lowest > denominator of your cluster, probably Nehalem. Ah okay. Normally, I compare the available cpu flags of my cluster and pass those flags individually. Maybe I have to revisit that logic. Peter