On 09/12/2010 12:06 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
For the Phenom type, I honestly don't remember why, but there was also a good
reason to add it. In fact, I use it today to have nested virt without -cpu host
on hardware that's too new for my guests.
Curious, what guests balk at modern hardware but are fine with phenom?
Sles11 GA ;).
Still curious, how does -cpu host break it?
Either way, I don't think we need a phenom2 type. The features additional are
minor enough to not really matter and all use cases I can come up with require
either -cpu host (local virt) or -cpu phenom (migration).
I'm fine with this (or with adding phenom2). But don't make phenom contain
flags that real phenoms don't have.
Those were my words :).
Then we are in agreement.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
