From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: kvm-87 fails to compile under uClibc Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:43:56 +0300 Message-ID: <4A5334FC.50100@redhat.com> References: <1246934566.27337.65.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A53117E.8050305@redhat.com> <1246966290.32432.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: uclibc , kvm To: Cristi Magherusan Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:48712 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753461AbZGGLmF (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jul 2009 07:42:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1246966290.32432.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/07/2009 02:31 PM, Cristi Magherusan wrote: > The kernel will be 2.6.24 because it's smaller. I know this mismatch may > not be good, but I have to get to a compromise. The kernel needs to be > as small as possible (everything should fit in a 4MB BIOS flash), and > also to support both this version of KVM and OpenVZ at the same time. > Older KVM versions have terrible buildsystem issues and I gave up trying > to get them compile in buildroot. I think OpenVZ could work on 2.6.26 > too, but I haven't tried yet. > > Could this be a real problem at runtime? > I think 2.6.24 is too old for current qemu-kvm. Also it doesn't receive security fixes; if you don't trust your users you should use 2.6.27.y or 2.6.30.y (or a vendor kernel). You can reduce qemu size by not compiling tcg; that'll save you a lot more than the kernel. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function