On Thu, 2022-01-20 at 19:43 +0100, Michael Opdenacker wrote: > Hi Alex > > On 1/20/22 4:28 PM, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > > I think this should cover aarch64 on aarch64 too :) And presence of > > (and ability to open) /dev/kvm is probably a better check than looking > > through cpuinfo? > > Thanks for the review! > > However, my abilities to build and test on aarch64 are limited. At least > this change would take me much more time to develop and is more likely > to cause regressions. > > Wouldn't this version already be a worthy change for users? I'm not sure > we have many users running QEMU on aarch64. Would automatically passing > the "kvm" option on applicable cases have value in our automated tests?
I think the patch as it stands will actually regress things for many users. You must be already in the right groups to be able to access kvm on your system but I don't think that is the default for many distros. On those distros you would see a "permission denied" message from qemu which users find very confusing and I think this is why the code is in the form it is in. We might be able to improve the test further with the open permissions Alexander mentions but that is probably necessary to make the patch mergable. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#160787): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/160787 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/88560844/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
