qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: "Kevin Wolf" <kwolf@redhat.com>, "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>,
	"Christophe de Dinechin" <dinechin@redhat.com>,
	"Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Priority of -accel
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 09:59:10 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87lfqajtwh.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ff78d961-9432-c84d-4bba-6df14b1a5a79@redhat.com> (Paolo Bonzini's message of "Mon, 13 Jan 2020 17:25:04 +0100")

Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> writes:

> On 13/01/20 17:17, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Perfect opportunity to change the default to something more useful.
>
> I am not sure acutally if it's that more useful, now that we have
> sanctioned qemu-kvm as the fast alternative.

If there is a fast alternative, why ship the slow one?

> Particularly it would be confusing for qemu-system-x86_64 to use
> hardware virtualization on Linux, but not on other operating systems
> where the accelerators are not stable enough.

Hardly more confusing than qemu-kvm not using hardware virtualization
when /dev/kvm is unavailable.

No matter what we do, somebody is going to be confused.  How to resolve
such a conundrum?  Utilitarian philosophy teaches us to pursue the
greatest confusion of the greatest numbers.  I think not using x86
hardware virtualization by default has been admirably successful there.

;-P



  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-14  9:00 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
2020-01-13 16:17         ` Priority of -accel Markus Armbruster
2020-01-13 16:25           ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-01-14  8:59             ` Markus Armbruster [this message]
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=87lfqajtwh.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org \
    --to=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=berrange@redhat.com \
    --cc=dinechin@redhat.com \
    --cc=kwolf@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).