From: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Cc: "Andreas Färber" <andreas.faerber@web.de>,
"Avi Kivity" <avi@redhat.com>,
"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: POLL: Why do you use kqemu?
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 11:33:07 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f43fc5580906070133y79e764c2uaf8cf2c04abb72fc@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A2B6DD8.3090104@web.de>
On 6/7/09, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de> wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
> > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>> 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.
> >>
> >
> > Requiring the latest up-to-date modules is pushing the problem to the
> > users. Sometimes there is no choice, but when there is, the
> > implementation that cares about its uses prefer unclean code and
> > functionality over perfection and brokenness.
>
>
> Let's make it more concrete:
>
> By the time upstream is as well tested, feature-rich and with comparable
> performance as qemu-kvm, its current baseline requirement (2.6.29 due to
> KVM_CAP_DESTROY_MEMORY_REGION_WORKS) will no longer be a problem to most
> normal users. Until then they are better off with qemu-kvm anyway.
>
> So all I wanted to express is that I see no point in merging workarounds
> upstream that hardly anyone will need but that restrict non-kvm code in
> upstream. Basically I have the current line along
> KVM_CAP_DESTROY_MEMORY_REGION_WORKS / clean memory slot management in
> mind. Anything older should be skipped when merging upstream. And unless
> something more problematic comes along (rather unlikely), 2.6.29 or
> compatible kvm-kmod is a reasonable minimum requirement for the long term.
I pulled qemu-kvm and it looks to me that
KVM_CAP_DESTROY_MEMORY_REGION_WORKS and the derived functions
kvm_destroy_memory_region_works() and must_use_aliases_*() are only
used in very few places. Do I miss something, how can this be of any
restriction?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-07 8:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-03 21:57 [Qemu-devel] POLL: Why do you use kqemu? Anthony Liguori
2009-06-04 16:55 ` Anton D Kachalov
2009-06-05 0:44 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-06-05 7:45 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2009-06-05 8:40 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
2009-06-05 9:08 ` Anton D Kachalov
2009-06-05 9:15 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2009-06-05 20:14 ` Lennart Sorensen
2009-06-05 23:23 ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-06-08 0:13 ` Jamie Lokier
2009-06-08 5:59 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-08 11:57 ` Jamie Lokier
2009-06-08 12:03 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-08 12:16 ` Jamie Lokier
2009-06-08 12:28 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-08 12:44 ` [Qemu-devel] " Jan Kiszka
2009-06-08 13:06 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-08 13:18 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-06-08 13:24 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-08 13:44 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-06-08 14:03 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-08 12:36 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-06-08 18:25 ` [Qemu-devel] " Lennart Sorensen
2009-06-06 13:27 ` Andreas Färber
2009-06-06 16:02 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-06 16:29 ` Blue Swirl
2009-06-06 17:02 ` [Qemu-devel] " Jan Kiszka
2009-06-06 17:25 ` Blue Swirl
2009-06-06 17:32 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-06-06 19:15 ` Andreas Färber
2009-06-07 5:43 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-07 5:01 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-07 7:35 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-06-07 7:46 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-07 8:33 ` Blue Swirl [this message]
2009-06-07 8:50 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-06-07 9:01 ` Blue Swirl
2009-06-07 9:25 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-06-07 9:37 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-07 9:47 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-06-07 9:52 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-07 9:56 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-06-07 10:06 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-07 11:13 ` Blue Swirl
2009-06-07 11:23 ` Gleb Natapov
2009-06-07 11:26 ` Blue Swirl
2009-06-07 11:29 ` Gleb Natapov
2009-06-07 11:39 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-07 12:40 ` Blue Swirl
2009-06-07 12:43 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-07 12:52 ` Gleb Natapov
2009-06-07 12:56 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-07 13:18 ` Blue Swirl
2009-06-07 13:35 ` Jan Kiszka
2009-06-07 13:35 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-07 18:37 ` Anthony Liguori
2009-06-07 18:40 ` Blue Swirl
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f43fc5580906070133y79e764c2uaf8cf2c04abb72fc@mail.gmail.com \
--to=blauwirbel@gmail.com \
--cc=andreas.faerber@web.de \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=jan.kiszka@web.de \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).