On 5 Oct 2014, at 08:00, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 29/09/2014 09:02, Markus Armbruster ha scritto:
If you were just objecting to the fact that pc-1.0 was made to
be an alias of either one or the other at compile time, simply
drop the second patch of the v2 patchset.
I
If you were just objecting to the fact that pc-1.0 was made to
be an alias of either one or the other at compile time, simply
drop the second patch of the v2 patchset.
I was objecting to making pc-1.0 special. There's nothing special in
pc-1.0, other machine types also had
On Sun, Oct 05, 2014 at 08:26:45AM -0400, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
If you were just objecting to the fact that pc-1.0 was made to
be an alias of either one or the other at compile time, simply
drop the second patch of the v2 patchset.
I was objecting to making pc-1.0 special.
Michael,
I'm about to post a nice simple v5 of this, but there are a couple of
your comments I am NOT addressing:
diff --git a/hw/acpi/piix4.c b/hw/acpi/piix4.c
index b72b34e..3c9da23 100644
--- a/hw/acpi/piix4.c
+++ b/hw/acpi/piix4.c
@@ -200,12 +200,26 @@ static const VMStateDescription
Alex Bligh a...@alex.org.uk writes:
[...]
+/* NB cirrus-vga default value is 8MB anyway, save if we
+ * monkey patch it to change the default when the qemu-kvm-migration
+ * machine parameter is selected
+ */
+
This is too hacky for my taste.
How about creating a new machine e.g.
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 09:33:08PM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
Hang on a second! v2 of this patch DID use a new virtual machine,
called exactly that. I thought you were objecting to that and
wanting a machine parameter instead! It's far easier with a new
machine type, and I'd far prefer a new
On 29 Sep 2014, at 11:08, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 09:33:08PM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
Hang on a second! v2 of this patch DID use a new virtual machine,
called exactly that. I thought you were objecting to that and
wanting a machine parameter instead!
Quoting Alex Bligh (a...@alex.org.uk):
On 29 Sep 2014, at 11:08, Michael S. Tsirkin m...@redhat.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 09:33:08PM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
Hang on a second! v2 of this patch DID use a new virtual machine,
called exactly that. I thought you were objecting to
Michael,
+static const VMStateDescription vmstate_acpi_compat = {
+.name = piix4_pm,
+.version_id = 3,
+.minimum_version_id = 2,
+.minimum_version_id_old = 1,
+.load_state_old = NULL, /* to avoid recursion */
+.post_load = vmstate_acpi_post_load,
+.fields
* Michael Tokarev (m...@tls.msk.ru) wrote:
22.09.2014 23:34, Alex Bligh wrote:
This patch series adds inbound migrate capability from qemu-kvm version
1.0. [...]
Isn't it quite a bit too late already? That's an old version by
now, and supporting migration from it is interesting for
Alex Bligh a...@alex.org.uk writes:
This patch series adds inbound migrate capability from qemu-kvm version
1.0. The main ideas are those set out in Cole Robinson's patch here:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/qemu.git/tree/0001-Fix-migration-from-qemu-kvm.patch?h=f20
however, rather than
Markus,
On 24 Sep 2014, at 09:05, Markus Armbruster arm...@redhat.com wrote:
Alex Bligh a...@alex.org.uk writes:
This patch series adds inbound migrate capability from qemu-kvm version
1.0. The main ideas are those set out in Cole Robinson's patch here:
22.09.2014 23:34, Alex Bligh wrote:
This patch series adds inbound migrate capability from qemu-kvm version
1.0. [...]
Isn't it quite a bit too late already? That's an old version by
now, and supporting migration from it is interesting for long-term
support distributions - like redhat for
13 matches
Mail list logo
