On 12/26/2011 07:37 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 12/19/2011 04:11 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Backwards compatibility
If we want backwards compatibility, we need more than just a simple feature
check, no? Oh, you feed that into CPUID? That's nifty. Ok, so you behave like
VMX/SVM do on real hardware - you always expose the functionality but don't
list it in CPUID for older user space.
Do we want this to be on when providing a compat machine type ("pc-0.12"
etc.) to the guest? Then it does need more work (see the dance around
kvmclock).
We do. I have a feeling the whole cpuid stuff, paravirt and
non-paravirt, needs some fixing in this area. It's different than the
normal compat code since not only qemu, but also kvm and the host cpu
have a say in what's supported and what's not.
Sorry, missed all threads except this due to some problem with mail
client config. Yet to explore on what is to be done, But I Agree for
the changes and work needed in this direction.
--
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
