On Mon, 24 May 2021 19:20:37 +0200
Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Fri, 14 May 2021 20:32:22 +0200
> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> > Il ven 14 mag 2021, 18:20 Daniel P. Berrangé ha
> > scritto:
> >
> > > My gut feeling though is accel-set would be more logical being done
> > > first, as that also
On Fri, 21 May 2021 18:57:36 +0200
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 21/05/21 16:06, Mirela Grujic wrote:
> >>
> >> PHASE_NO_MACHINE
> >> -> machine-set -> PHASE_MACHINE_CREATED ->
> >> -> accel-set -> PHASE_ACCEL_CREATED -> PHASE_MACHINE_INITIALIZED ->
> >
> >
> > My understanding is that an
On Fri, 14 May 2021 20:32:22 +0200
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il ven 14 mag 2021, 18:20 Daniel P. Berrangé ha
> scritto:
>
> > My gut feeling though is accel-set would be more logical being done
> > first, as that also influences the set of features available in other
> > areas of QEMU
On 21/05/21 13:32, Markus Armbruster wrote:
PHASE_NO_MACHINE
-> machine-set -> PHASE_MACHINE_CREATED ->
-> accel-set -> PHASE_ACCEL_CREATED -> PHASE_MACHINE_INITIALIZED ->
-> finish-machine-init -> PHASE_MACHINE_READY
-> cont
Is machine-set one big command, or a sequence of
On 21/05/21 16:06, Mirela Grujic wrote:
PHASE_NO_MACHINE
-> machine-set -> PHASE_MACHINE_CREATED ->
-> accel-set -> PHASE_ACCEL_CREATED -> PHASE_MACHINE_INITIALIZED ->
My understanding is that an equivalent of previously supported
'preconfig' state is PHASE_ACCEL_CREATED, from the
I cc-ed Igor because he worked on preconfig support.
On 5/13/21 7:52 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Hi Mirela, this is very interesting!
It's unfortunate that I completely missed the discussions in
January/February. You might have noticed that in the 5.2/6.0
timeframe I worked on cleaning up the
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> Hi Mirela, this is very interesting!
>
> It's unfortunate that I completely missed the discussions in
> January/February. You might have noticed that in the 5.2/6.0
> timeframe I worked on cleaning up the machine initialization phases
> and qemu_init. The idea behind
Il ven 14 mag 2021, 18:20 Daniel P. Berrangé ha
scritto:
> My gut feeling though is accel-set would be more logical being done
> first, as that also influences the set of features available in other
> areas of QEMU configuration. Was there a reason you listed it after
> machine-set ?
>
That was
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 06:00:37PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 14/05/21 14:48, Mirela Grujic wrote:
> >
> > With our approach, transitioning to the QMP configuration suppose to
> > happen gradually, i.e. we still specify some configuration options via
> > command line. For your approach to
On 14/05/21 14:48, Mirela Grujic wrote:
With our approach, transitioning to the QMP configuration suppose to
happen gradually, i.e. we still specify some configuration options via
command line. For your approach to be applicable to our use case we
would at least need a QMP equivalent for the
Hi Paolo,
Thanks for the feedback!
On 5/13/21 7:52 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Hi Mirela, this is very interesting!
It's unfortunate that I completely missed the discussions in
January/February. You might have noticed that in the 5.2/6.0
timeframe I worked on cleaning up the machine
Hi Mirela, this is very interesting!
It's unfortunate that I completely missed the discussions in
January/February. You might have noticed that in the 5.2/6.0 timeframe
I worked on cleaning up the machine initialization phases and qemu_init.
The idea behind the cleanup was to identify
The direction for this work has been set in the discussion thread:
"About creating machines on the command line" in January/February 2021:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-01/msg01839.html
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-02/msg01070.html
To customize a machine
13 matches
Mail list logo
