On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 02:41:54PM +0100, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 19:26:25 -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > Awesome. So, if Qemu and libvirt disagrees, libvirt will know that and
> > add the necessary flags? That was my main worry. If disagreement between
> > Qemu and libvir
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 04:07:06PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> >
> > (Do we have any case of capability-querying being made using QMP before
> > starting any actual VM, today?)
>
> Right now, we have two levels of queries - the 'qemu -help' and 'qemu
> -device ?' output is gathered up front (we re
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 19:26:25 -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> Awesome. So, if Qemu and libvirt disagrees, libvirt will know that and
> add the necessary flags? That was my main worry. If disagreement between
> Qemu and libvirt is not a problem, it would make things much easier.
>
> ...but:
>
>
On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 16:07 -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 03/07/2012 03:26 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > Thanks a lot for the explanations, Daniel.
> >
> > Comments about specific items inline.
> >
>
> >>> - How can we make sure there is no confusion between libvirt and Qemu
> >>> about t
On 03/07/2012 03:26 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> Thanks a lot for the explanations, Daniel.
>
> Comments about specific items inline.
>
>>> - How can we make sure there is no confusion between libvirt and Qemu
>>> about the CPU models? For example, what if cpu_map.xml says model
>>> 'M
Thanks a lot for the explanations, Daniel.
Comments about specific items inline.
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 02:18:28PM +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > I have two main points I would like to understand/discuss:
> >
> > 1) The relationship between libvirt's cpu_map.xml and the Qemu CPU model
> >
