On 2013年05月22日 04:01, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com writes:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:12:26AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
I have also argued in the past that it would be useful for libvirt to
support the idea of a template, where you can specify a domain XML that
On 21 May 2013 09:19, Li Zhang zhlci...@gmail.com wrote:
We encounter this problem in openstack which always use
default machine type. Currently, QEMU sets mac99 as default
setting for ppc64 but it doesn't work on our platform at all.
I tried to fix this in libvirt which it is not acceptable
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 09:31:26AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 21 May 2013 09:19, Li Zhang zhlci...@gmail.com wrote:
We encounter this problem in openstack which always use
default machine type. Currently, QEMU sets mac99 as default
setting for ppc64 but it doesn't work on our platform
On 2013年05月21日 16:31, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 21 May 2013 09:19, Li Zhang zhlci...@gmail.com wrote:
We encounter this problem in openstack which always use
default machine type. Currently, QEMU sets mac99 as default
setting for ppc64 but it doesn't work on our platform at all.
I tried to fix
On 21 May 2013 09:39, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
Libvirt has always had support for specifying what machine type to use.
This discussion is simply about what machine type to default to, if the
user hasn't explicitly asked for one.
QEMU has the notion of a default machine
On 2013年05月21日 16:45, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 21 May 2013 09:39, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
Libvirt has always had support for specifying what machine type to use.
This discussion is simply about what machine type to default to, if the
user hasn't explicitly asked for one.
On 21 May 2013 10:02, Li Zhang zhlci...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2013年05月21日 16:45, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 21 May 2013 09:39, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
Libvirt has always had support for specifying what machine type to use.
OK, that makes sense. So is the problem here just
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 05:02:51PM +0800, Li Zhang wrote:
On 2013年05月21日 16:45, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 21 May 2013 09:39, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
Libvirt has always had support for specifying what machine type to use.
This discussion is simply about what machine type to
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 09:39:53AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 09:31:26AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 21 May 2013 09:19, Li Zhang zhlci...@gmail.com wrote:
We encounter this problem in openstack which always use
default machine type. Currently, QEMU sets
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 07:55:27PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 09:39:53AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 09:31:26AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 21 May 2013 09:19, Li Zhang zhlci...@gmail.com wrote:
We encounter this problem in
On 21 May 2013 11:01, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 07:55:27PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
I think libvirt needs some more sensible way to ask qemu what its
capabilities are. Currently it has no way to ask qemu what machines
can you emulate with kvm
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com writes:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 07:55:27PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 09:39:53AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
QEMU has the notion of a default machine for each target, and that is
what libvirt uses if the user hasn't
On 21 May 2013 13:04, Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws wrote:
We've talked in the past about having an accelerator specific machine
default. I think this is a perfectly reasonable thing to do and would
solve the problem for ARM and for PPC.
For ARM I would prefer not to have a default at
On 21/05/13 14:04, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com writes:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 07:55:27PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 09:39:53AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
QEMU has the notion of a default machine for each target, and that is
On 2013年05月21日 17:25, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 05:02:51PM +0800, Li Zhang wrote:
On 2013年05月21日 16:45, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 21 May 2013 09:39, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
Libvirt has always had support for specifying what machine type to use.
This
On 2013年05月21日 17:55, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 09:39:53AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 09:31:26AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 21 May 2013 09:19, Li Zhang zhlci...@gmail.com wrote:
We encounter this problem in openstack which always use
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com writes:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 07:55:27PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 09:39:53AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I think libvirt needs some more sensible way to ask qemu what its
capabilities are. Currently it has no way to
On 05/21/2013 10:42 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Perhaps the right thing to do for OpenStack is to allow for a user
specified configuration file to select things like the default hardware
models/machine types? Then this could become node configuration instead
of dynamic configuration.
I
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:12:26AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
On 05/21/2013 10:42 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Perhaps the right thing to do for OpenStack is to allow for a user
specified configuration file to select things like the default hardware
models/machine types? Then this could become
Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com writes:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:12:26AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
I have also argued in the past that it would be useful for libvirt to
support the idea of a template, where you can specify a domain XML that
inherits defaults from the template. We've
20 matches
Mail list logo
