On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 07:01:33PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Before: object-initial, chardev, qtest, object-late (not in the patch) > > > > After: chardev, qtest, object-initial, object-late (not in the patch) > > > > Objects must be initialized before chardev (except rng-egd) since in the > > future chardev will need to use objects, in particular secret objects. > > Was the swap intentional? > > Yes, without the swap, qtest was not initialized before memory is allocated. > > The alternative I could think of is to check the QTEST_QEMU_BINARY > variable: > http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-11/msg01527.html
Why do we not simply delete the warning message about the path not being on hugetlbfs ? ie, why does QEMU try to force a policy that a memory-file backend has to be on hugetlbfs, as opposed to on a plain tmpfs ? I've previously had user request that we allow use of plain tmpfs, because they want to use vhost-user without also using hugepages, and that could be done with plain tmpfs. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
