Il 25/11/2014 08:37, Francesco Romani ha scritto: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected], [email protected] >> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:07:14 AM >> Subject: [ovirt-users] [QE][ACTION REQUIRED] oVirt 3.5.1 RC status - >> postponed > > [...] >> The following bugs have been keyworded as Regression and not marked as >> blockers: >> 1165336 virt ASSIGNED FC20 qemu needs kvmclock >> bugfixes > > Hi, > > I'd like to elaborate a bit more here for the sake of the openness. > TL;DR version > > - no actual regression in oVirt, meaning 'we applied a patch and we broke > something'. > - "fix" is underway - to propose the relevant patches to Fedora QEMU package > > Long(ish) version > > 1 some time ago we adhered to QEMU/KVM clock settings recommendations (see > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1053846) > 2 these recommendations are *still* valid as today - I just checked with > upstream developers > while investigating bz1165336 > 3 these recommendations may have surprising effects like disabling HPET clock > 4 on some old(ish) upstream QEMUs, disabling HPET may hurt migrations - hence > bz1165336 > 5 only *very* recent QEMUs (2.2.0rc0!) have the fixes, which are about > improving > kvm clock, while HPET clock is still not recommended (see #2 above) > 6 if the qemu-kvm-rhev is used (available in the oVirt repo), the experience > is significantly better > > > However, the reporter *has* a very valid point, which motivated me to write > me this mail: > a. F20 is a supported platform > b. I *guess* Fedora is the platform of choice to try out QEMU and to > initially play with it > c. out-of-the box experience with oVirt and Fedora is cumbersome, many steps > and tunings are needed. > This may annoy users - without a valid reason!
Can you detail the "many steps and tunings are needed"? I just install Fedora 20 and oVirt 3.5 snapshot and it usually just works... > d. hence there is an unneededly high first step to try out oVirt, and this is > hurting the project > > Now, I'd like to raise this question > > * it is true that Fedora is the platform of choice to try out and evaluate > oVirt? > * if so, is the experience on Fedora streamlined enough or could it made > simple, hence we could > have a better vector to spread oVirt? > * what we could do, as oVirt project, to improve the above? > > Feedback welcome > -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
