Any idea on my assumed scenario?
If this is really an issue, it's something we need fix it IMHO.
Thanks
--jyh
> -Original Message-
> From: Jiang, Yunhong
> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 4:52 PM
> To: Eric Blake
> Cc: libvir-list@redhat.com
> Subject: RE: [li
release definition to check Host B's capabilities,
this
is sure to be wrong, since host B does not have feature 'd'.
I think the key point is, capabilities describe features with
information from cpu_maps.xml, which is a per-host file.
Thanks
--jyh
Will depends on
>
Eric, thanks for the answer very .much, that's really helpful.
Sorry for the wrong format, I'm using outlook and possibly some setting wrong.
Thanks
--jyh
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Blake [mailto:ebl...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 11:23 PM
&
Hi, all
I have two questions to the cpu_maps.xml in different releases, hope
someone can give me some hints:
a) Will it be possible that the features defined in cpu_maps.xml for
one specific CPU model (like Nehalem) will be different? For example, one
feature is not listed for N