Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 01/19/2010 02:03 PM, Chris Wright wrote: >> * Anthony Liguori (anth...@codemonkey.ws) wrote: >> >>> I'm very much against having -cpu Nehalem. The whole point of this is >>> to make things easier for a user and for most of the users I've >>> encountered, -cpu Nehalem is just as obscure as -cpu >>> qemu64,-sse3,+vmx,... >>> >> What name will these users know? FWIW, it makes sense to me as it is. >> > > Whatever is in /proc/cpuinfo.
$ grep name /proc/cpuinfo model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz Which is detailing that exact cpu vs. the class of which it is a member. So are you suggesting to map all instances of processors called out in /proc/cpuinfo into one of the three defined models? We can certainly do that however I was looking for a more terse and simplified solution at this level while deferring more ornate mapping schemes to management tools. Still at the user facing CLI this doesn't strike me as the most friendly encoding of a -cpu <name>. -john -- john.coo...@redhat.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html