From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To: Christophe de Dinechin <dinechin@redhat.com>
Cc: "Thomas Huth" <thuth@redhat.com>,
"Daniel Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>,
qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
"Wainer dos Santos Moschetta" <wainersm@redhat.com>,
"Max Reitz" <mreitz@redhat.com>,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option)
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 10:47:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200108094724.GB5057@dhcp-200-226.str.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5FB9F11E-77DC-4FD6-B780-AB508DD42B42@redhat.com>
Am 07.01.2020 um 18:43 hat Christophe de Dinechin geschrieben:
> > It would break backwards compatibility for "-machine accel=tcg:kvm",
> > which so far meant "use TCG if compiled in, otherwise use KVM". This is
> > not something I would have a problem with... except that "tcg:kvm" is
> > the default if no -accel option is provided!
>
> What is the rationale for picking tcg over kvm?
>
> My guess is that when this was selected, KVM was the new fancy unstable
> thing and this was deemed the safe choice. My other guess is that this was
> around 1907 or so :-) My third guess is that you will probably provide me
> with a much better rationale ;-)
I know I intentionally disabled KVM in the past for debugging guests
because TCG allowed a few more things there (most of -d doesn't do
anything with KVM, and I think the gdb stub also had some restrictions).
Requiring an explicit '-accel tcg' for such cases might be reasonable
enough, though.
(And if we make this change and therefore break with the habit that
Peter mentioned - leaving defaults unchanged - could we make more
changes that better reflect a typical use case today? For example, I
doubt most people can do with only 128 MB of RAM in the guest.)
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-08 9:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-06 13:09 [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-01-06 13:16 ` Max Reitz
2020-01-07 10:03 ` Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option) Thomas Huth
2020-01-07 10:14 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-07 12:18 ` Thomas Huth
2020-01-07 12:23 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-07 12:54 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-01-07 14:14 ` Thomas Huth
2020-01-07 14:20 ` Priority of -accel Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-01-07 14:27 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-01-07 14:35 ` Thomas Huth
2020-01-13 14:39 ` Markus Armbruster
2020-01-13 16:14 ` Christophe de Dinechin
2020-01-13 16:23 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-07 14:26 ` Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option) Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-01-08 10:39 ` Alex Bennée
2020-01-08 10:58 ` Thomas Huth
2020-01-08 12:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-08 13:10 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-01-08 13:24 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-08 14:00 ` Priority of -accel Thomas Huth
2020-01-08 11:00 ` Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option) Peter Maydell
2020-01-10 10:43 ` Peter Maydell
2020-01-07 12:29 ` Kevin Wolf
2020-01-07 12:34 ` Priority of -accel Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-01-07 12:37 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-01-07 13:55 ` Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option) Christophe de Dinechin
2020-01-07 14:37 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-07 14:42 ` Thomas Huth
2020-01-07 17:43 ` Christophe de Dinechin
2020-01-07 17:53 ` Peter Maydell
2020-01-08 9:47 ` Kevin Wolf [this message]
2020-01-13 16:17 ` Priority of -accel Markus Armbruster
2020-01-13 16:25 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-14 8:59 ` Markus Armbruster
2020-01-14 10:44 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-14 17:49 ` Christophe de Dinechin
2020-01-14 17:59 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
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=20200108094724.GB5057@dhcp-200-226.str.redhat.com \
--to=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=dinechin@redhat.com \
--cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=philmd@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
--cc=wainersm@redhat.com \
/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).