From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MCzeJ-0005aT-Mc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 13:25:43 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MCzeH-0005aH-AR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 13:25:42 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56622 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MCzeH-0005aE-4M for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 13:25:41 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.156]:11677) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MCzeG-0002To-R2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 13:25:41 -0400 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e21so665932fga.8 for ; Sat, 06 Jun 2009 10:25:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4A2AA10B.6060401@web.de> References: <4A26F1E3.1040509@codemonkey.ws> <4A2A92FE.2010700@redhat.com> <4A2AA10B.6060401@web.de> Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 20:25:39 +0300 Message-ID: From: Blue Swirl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu? List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=C3=A4rber?= , Avi Kivity , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" On 6/6/09, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Blue Swirl wrote: > > On 6/6/09, Avi Kivity wrote: > >> Andreas F=C3=A4rber wrote: > >> > >>> Or as another example, I've been unable to try KVM with svn/git QEMU > >> because new capability defines keep being added that block compiling = QEMU > >> with KVM from any mainstream distribution. With nobody here being abl= e to > >> recommend a working distribution, that makes KVM a moot alternative, > >> especially on systems you can't install your own kernel modules on. I= just > >> hope that Fedora 11 will let me try it. > >> Try qemu-kvm.git, that should compile and run on almost anything (an= d is a > >> lot faster and more featureful than kvm support in qemu.git). > > > > Maybe the backwards compatibility features should be ported to QEMU? > > For example, is there a workaround for > > #error Missing KVM capability KVM_CAP_DESTROY_MEMORY_REGION_WORKS > > ? > > > Given that we have always-up-to-date kvm-kmod packages with support down > to reasonable kernel versions, I would prefer to keep upstream clean > from old workarounds. They should only be needed for issues found very > recently (KVM_CAP_JOIN_MEMORY_REGIONS_WORKS) or that might be found in > the future. But then I (and from Andreas' message I gather that many others) can't test KVM support on QEMU without building, installing and maintaining (updating, rebuilding, reinstalling etc) my own kernel instead of the distro build. Does this also mean that KVM stuff in QEMU releases will not be usable for anyone (except those building their own kernels) until distros upgrade to a compatible kernel version a few years later?