Re: [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate support for 32-bit x86 and arm hosts

"Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:05:16PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: >> Well, without CI, I assume that the code will bitrot quite fast (considering >> that there are continuous improvements to TCG, for example). > > We have lots of hosts which we don't test with CI. They

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate support for 32-bit x86 and arm hosts

On 28/02/2023 22.32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:05:16PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: Well, without CI, I assume that the code will bitrot quite fast (considering that there are continuous improvements to TCG, for example). We have lots of hosts which we don't test with C

Re: [libvirt PATCH] NEWS: Clarify limitations of passt support

On 2/28/23 4:34 PM, Andrea Bolognani wrote: Let users know that we're working on lifting the limitations and that they should not use the feature in production until then. Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani Reviewed-by: Laine Stump I think I like your version better, as it is less wordy, while

Re: [PATCH] NEWS: note new passt feature & bugfix for 9.1.0 release

On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 13:29:18 -0800 Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 07:53:09PM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 10:06:18 -0800 Andrea Bolognani > > wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:49:26AM -0500, Laine Stump wrote: > > > > +(NB: it is still ne

[libvirt PATCH] NEWS: Clarify limitations of passt support

Let users know that we're working on lifting the limitations and that they should not use the feature in production until then. Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani --- NEWS.rst | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/NEWS.rst b/NEWS.rst index 683c147af0..b19c75ceac 100

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate support for 32-bit x86 and arm hosts

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:05:16PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > Well, without CI, I assume that the code will bitrot quite fast (considering > that there are continuous improvements to TCG, for example). We have lots of hosts which we don't test with CI. They don't bitrot because people do testing

Re: [PATCH] NEWS: note new passt feature & bugfix for 9.1.0 release

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 07:53:09PM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote: > On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 10:06:18 -0800 Andrea Bolognani > wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:49:26AM -0500, Laine Stump wrote: > > > +(NB: it is still necessary to disable SELinux to start passt.) > > > > This is also true for A

[PATCH] NEWS: strongly suggest that not yet be used in production

Based on Stefano's suggestion that the NEWS should not seem to encourage disabling SELinux or AppArmor (which is a valid point) this replaces the "you need to disable SELinux/AppArmor" note with a "please do not use in production because that will require disabling SELinux/AppArmor". Signed-off-by

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate support for 32-bit x86 and arm hosts

On 28/02/2023 10.01, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:39:49AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: On 27/02/2023 19.38, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 12:10:48PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: We're struggling quite badly with our CI minutes on the shared gitlab runners,

Re: [PATCH] NEWS: note new passt feature & bugfix for 9.1.0 release

On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 10:06:18 -0800 Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:49:26AM -0500, Laine Stump wrote: > > + * QEMU: properly report passt startup errors > > + > > +Due to how the child passt process was started, the initial > > +support for passt (added in 9.0.0) woul

Re: [PATCH] NEWS: note new passt feature & bugfix for 9.1.0 release

On 2/28/23 11:11 AM, Peter Krempa wrote: On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:49:26 -0500, Laine Stump wrote: At Stefano's suggestion, this also adds a sentence pointing out that SELinux must be disabled in order for passt support to work. I didn't think to put this info in the NEWS file last month. Sign

Re: [PATCH] NEWS: Mention two user-visible bug fixes

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 05:23:00PM +0100, Peter Krempa wrote: > + * qemu: Fix error when attempting to change media in a CDROM drive > + > +Due to a logic bug introduced in libvirt-9.0 attempts to change media in > a > +CDROM would previously fail with an error stating that the tray isn't

Re: [PATCH] NEWS: note new passt feature & bugfix for 9.1.0 release

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:49:26AM -0500, Laine Stump wrote: > + * QEMU: properly report passt startup errors > + > +Due to how the child passt process was started, the initial > +support for passt (added in 9.0.0) would not see errors > +encountered during startup, so libvirt would co

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On 2/27/23 23:00, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:21:14AM -1000, Richard Henderson wrote: Removing support for building on 32 bit systems seems like a pity - it's one of a small number of ways to run 64 bit binaries on 32 bit systems, and the maintainance overhead is quite s

[PATCH] NEWS: Mention two user-visible bug fixes

Signed-off-by: Peter Krempa --- NEWS.rst | 12 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) diff --git a/NEWS.rst b/NEWS.rst index d1f88b3d59..ca93c24150 100644 --- a/NEWS.rst +++ b/NEWS.rst @@ -80,6 +80,18 @@ v9.1.0 (unreleased) (NB: it is still necessary to disable SELinux to start pass

Re: [PATCH] NEWS: note new passt feature & bugfix for 9.1.0 release

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:49:26 -0500, Laine Stump wrote: > At Stefano's suggestion, this also adds a sentence pointing out that > SELinux must be disabled in order for passt support to work. I didn't > think to put this info in the NEWS file last month. > > Signed-off-by: Laine Stump > --- > >

[PATCH] NEWS: note new passt feature & bugfix for 9.1.0 release

At Stefano's suggestion, this also adds a sentence pointing out that SELinux must be disabled in order for passt support to work. I didn't think to put this info in the NEWS file last month. Signed-off-by: Laine Stump --- I've noticed that in some places, QEMU related points are marked with "QEM

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On 28/2/23 09:59, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:21:14AM -1000, Richard Henderson wrote: On 2/27/23 10:12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 11:50:07AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: I feel like we should have separate deprecation entries for the i686 ho

Re: [PATCH 0/4] qemu: Fix regression wrt virtio-pmem

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 12:35 PM Michal Privoznik wrote: > The first one fixes a regression in which we're unable to start a domain > with a virtio-pmem device. It should go into the release. The rest is > just a cleanup because the function in question started looking > disarranged. > > Michal P

Re: [PATCH 3/4] qemu_monitor: Switch to virDomainMemoryModel enum in qemuMonitorJSONGetMemoryDeviceInfo()

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 2:04 PM Michal Prívozník wrote: > On 2/27/23 13:49, Kristina Hanicova wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 12:35 PM Michal Privoznik > > wrote: > > > > When processing memory devices (as a reply from QEMU), a bunch of > > STREQ()-

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate support for 32-bit x86 and arm hosts

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:01:46AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > If we're merely wanting to drop CI support, we can do that any time and > deprecation is not required/expected. We should only be using deprecation > where we're explicitly intending that the code will cease to work. Good point

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 12:34:19PM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: > If it's not worth arguing, then we merge Thomas's patch. I don't mind but it's just a doc patch isn't it? If what we want to do is to stop doing make check on a 32 bit container and just to do make then let's patch the relevant y

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

"Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 11:39:39AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> The question to answer: Is 32 bit x86 worth its upkeep? Two >> sub-questions: 1. Is it worth the human attention? 2. Is it worth >> (scarce!) CI minutes? > > 3. Is it worth arguing about? If it

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 06:24:02AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 12:12:22PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > On 28/02/2023 11.51, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 11:39:39AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: > > > > The question to answer: Is 32 bit x8

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 12:12:22PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 28/02/2023 11.51, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 11:39:39AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: > > > The question to answer: Is 32 bit x86 worth its upkeep? Two > > > sub-questions: 1. Is it worth the human atten

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On 28/02/2023 11.51, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 11:39:39AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: The question to answer: Is 32 bit x86 worth its upkeep? Two sub-questions: 1. Is it worth the human attention? 2. Is it worth (scarce!) CI minutes? 3. Is it worth arguing about?

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 11:39:39AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: > The question to answer: Is 32 bit x86 worth its upkeep? Two > sub-questions: 1. Is it worth the human attention? 2. Is it worth > (scarce!) CI minutes? 3. Is it worth arguing about? -- MST

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

"Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:40:49AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:14:52AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: >> > On 28/02/2023 10.03, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:59:52AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: >> > >

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:40:49AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:14:52AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > On 28/02/2023 10.03, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:59:52AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 03:19:20AM

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:14:52AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 28/02/2023 10.03, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:59:52AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 03:19:20AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:49:09AM

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On 28/02/2023 10.03, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:59:52AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 03:19:20AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:49:09AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: On 27/02/2023 21.12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:59:52AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 03:19:20AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:49:09AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > On 27/02/2023 21.12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 11:50:07AM

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate support for 32-bit x86 and arm hosts

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:39:49AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 27/02/2023 19.38, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 12:10:48PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > We're struggling quite badly with our CI minutes on the shared > > > gitlab runners, so we urgently need to think of w

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:21:14AM -1000, Richard Henderson wrote: > > Removing support for building on 32 bit systems seems like a pity - it's > > one of a small number of ways to run 64 bit binaries on 32 bit systems, > > and the maintainance overhead is quite small. > > It's not that small. Me

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 10:21:14AM -1000, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 2/27/23 10:12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 11:50:07AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > I feel like we should have separate deprecation entries for the > > > i686 host support, and for qemu-system

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 03:19:20AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:49:09AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > On 27/02/2023 21.12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 11:50:07AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > > I feel like we should have separate

Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/about: Deprecate 32-bit x86 hosts and qemu-system-i386

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 08:49:09AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 27/02/2023 21.12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 11:50:07AM +, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > I feel like we should have separate deprecation entries for the > > > i686 host support, and for qemu-system-i3