On 09/25/2014 02:59 PM, Ján Tomko wrote:
> On 09/25/2014 04:31 AM, zhang bo wrote:
>> On 2014/9/24 19:49, Ján Tomko wrote:
>>> I think the simplest fix for host-passthrough would be to apply the same
>>> filter host-model has.
>>>
>>> But since using invtsc with host-passthrough requires both +invt
On 09/25/2014 04:31 AM, zhang bo wrote:
> On 2014/9/24 19:49, Ján Tomko wrote:
>> I think the simplest fix for host-passthrough would be to apply the same
>> filter host-model has.
>>
>> But since using invtsc with host-passthrough requires both +invtsc and
>> migratable=no, so we'd need to either
On 2014/9/24 19:49, Ján Tomko wrote:
> On 09/24/2014 05:28 AM, zhang bo wrote:
>> The patch
>> http://libvirt.org/git/?p=libvirt.git;a=commitdiff;h=de0aeafe9ce3eb414c8b5d3aa8995d776a2952de
>> removes invtsc flag in the host-model CPU.
>>
>> I'm wondering, will it be better to pass args "migratable
On 09/24/2014 05:28 AM, zhang bo wrote:
> The patch
> http://libvirt.org/git/?p=libvirt.git;a=commitdiff;h=de0aeafe9ce3eb414c8b5d3aa8995d776a2952de
> removes invtsc flag in the host-model CPU.
>
> I'm wondering, will it be better to pass args "migratable=no/yes" to qemu,
> and let qemu complete t
The patch
http://libvirt.org/git/?p=libvirt.git;a=commitdiff;h=de0aeafe9ce3eb414c8b5d3aa8995d776a2952de
removes invtsc flag in the host-model CPU.
I'm wondering, will it be better to pass args "migratable=no/yes" to qemu, and
let qemu complete the
remaining work? As that qemu has checked whether
