On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 05:28:22PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 05:05:25PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >> > +static bool _kvm_pv_eoi_disabled;
> >>
> >> NACK. I find your lack of compliance disturbing.
> >
> > Comp
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 05:05:25PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> > +static bool _kvm_pv_eoi_disabled;
>>
>> NACK. I find your lack of compliance disturbing.
>
> Compliance with what? Could you please add some
> motivation for the NACK?
Yo
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 05:05:25PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> > +static bool _kvm_pv_eoi_disabled;
>
> NACK. I find your lack of compliance disturbing.
Compliance with what? Could you please add some
motivation for the NACK?
--
MST
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kv
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> In preparation for adding PV EOI support, disable PV EOI by default for
> 1.1 and older machine types, to avoid CPUID changing during migration.
>
> PV EOI can still be enabled/disabled by specifying it explicitly.
> Enable for 1.1
>
In preparation for adding PV EOI support, disable PV EOI by default for
1.1 and older machine types, to avoid CPUID changing during migration.
PV EOI can still be enabled/disabled by specifying it explicitly.
Enable for 1.1
-M pc-1.1 -cpu kvm64,+kvm_pv_eoi
Disable for 1.2
-M pc-1.2
