On 21/03/11 7:08 PM, Stanley Lieber wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Brad<b...@comstyle.com> wrote:
On 22/03/11 4:54 PM, Stanley Lieber wrote:
I've gotten one request to decommission qemu-old. It surprised me,
as I thought there were still issues with qemu/ even with the semi recent
thread fix as well as performance differences.
Does anybody have objection to retiring qemu-old to the attic or ?
I'd rather not do this prematurely but if the time has come, this is the
right time of release cycle to do it.
I'm probably less educated about the functionality of newer qemu than I
should be, but I still use the old version from ports (along with kqemu)
to host
Plan 9 on various systems. My understanding is that moving to the newer
version(s) of qemu would introduce a performance hit, since kqemu is
deprecated
and whatever newer, fancier kernel integration has been introduced is not
yet
supported on OpenBSD.
Is this wildly off-base?
KQEMU is an unsupported piece of code that no one has ever maintained,
doesn't work on MP kernels and has issues even on SP kernels. It's not
deprecated. It is plain dead, period. No one cared to actually fix it when
the QEMU developers asked on their list for the OS's that actually
used it (*BSD, Solaris) and later some of its design limitations prevented
further progress so support was removed all together.
Taking that out of the picture and doing an apples to apples comparison can
you find any real issues between the versions of QEMU that have a real
effect on your Plan 9 images?
No experimental evidence, yet, but I'm willing to give it a shot. Subjectively,
the old qemu feels quite a bit slower without kqemu.
Of course. That's an apples to oranges comparison.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
