Avi Kivity wrote: > Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Howdy, >> >> Here's a tiny patch that adds a i386-kvm target. The main difference >> between the i386-kvm and i386-softmmu target is that the -kvm target >> does not have any of the dyngen infrastructure. This means that it >> will build with gcc-4. I know you can do --cc=gcc to use gcc-4 but >> quite a few versions of gcc-4 have trouble with compiling dyngen. >> >> I also suspect this may prove useful down the road. What do other >> people think? I'm not terribly tied to the i386-kvm name for what >> it's worth. >> > > That kills the -no-kvm switch, which allows a single binary to be used > both with and without kvm. Or do you think both target-i386+kvm and > target-kvm ought to be kept?
I think both should be kept. I think configure ought to be smart enough to figure out if gcc-3 is available and build the appropriate targets. Adding the new target is a small enough patch that it won't be offensive and should make a lot of users happy. > My thinking about qemu integration is that kqemu/kvm code needs to be > abstracted into an API to reduce the #ifdefing in qemu, and that API > could call kqemu or kvm as appropriate. That's definitely not a bad idea. Regards, Anthony Liguori ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
