From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37643) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fXWCG-0008Bm-Vh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:26:41 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fXWCC-0005EN-2o for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:26:40 -0400 References: <20180613151942.GC19901@redhat.com> <87k1r24quk.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <20180619171539.0adc90d6.cohuck@redhat.com> <20180622181108.GY7451@localhost.localdomain> <20180622193522.GI7451@localhost.localdomain> <743d495e-51cd-8c8e-293e-026b8dece74a@redhat.com> <87lgb3xsv8.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <4292432f-5f26-6925-4c14-ad1370e36e5b@redhat.com> <20180625173056.GM7451@localhost.localdomain> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <97504b42-9ebe-45c5-6ff3-b43102c8374a@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 20:26:28 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180625173056.GM7451@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 4/4] qemu-options: Do not show -enable-kvm and -enable-hax in the docs anymore List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eduardo Habkost Cc: Markus Armbruster , Thomas Huth , zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com, Ben Warren , qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, Cornelia Huck , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi On 25/06/2018 19:30, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >>> Attentive distros could even replace the wrapper script by a link. >> If they are okay with replacing the "KVM only" semantics with "KVM or >> TCG", which I think is generally worse. > > If we can't get agreement on what's the right default for each > QEMU binary, I think that's yet another reason to document that > upstream QEMU won't guarantee ABI compatibility if -accel is > omitted. Before that we should ask what the benefit is in changing the default for qemu-system-*. Nobody is using it in practice to start QEMU with KVM enabled... Paolo > If downstream distributions want to keep promising ABI > compatibility, it will be up to them.