[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to
From: |
Paolo Bonzini |
Subject: |
Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option) |
Date: |
Tue, 7 Jan 2020 15:37:35 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.1 |
On 07/01/20 14:55, Christophe de Dinechin wrote:
> So what about ranking the accelerators, so that all combinaisons
> -accel=kvm:tcg, -accel=tcg:kvm, -accel kvm -accel tcg, etc would
(I assume you mean "-machine accel=kvm:tcg" and "-machine accel=tcg:kvm"
for the first two. This is the "older" way which has now become sugar
for "-accel kvm -accel tcg").
> all pickup kvm if available, and tcg as a fallback? Implementation-wise,
> it would simply mean ranking the accelerators and updating the accelerator
> only if it’s available and better.
This is an interesting idea. I like this better than "-accel best",
because "-accel best" has the problem that you can't add suboptions to
it (the suboptions for the various accelerators are disjoint).
It would break backwards compatibility for "-machine accel=tcg:kvm",
which so far meant "use TCG if compiled in, otherwise use KVM". This is
not something I would have a problem with... except that "tcg:kvm" is
the default if no -accel option is provided!
Paolo
- Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option), (continued)
- Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option), Peter Maydell, 2020/01/08
- Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option), Peter Maydell, 2020/01/10
- Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option), Kevin Wolf, 2020/01/07
- Re: Priority of -accel, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé, 2020/01/07
- Re: Priority of -accel, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé, 2020/01/07
- Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option), Christophe de Dinechin, 2020/01/07
- Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option),
Paolo Bonzini <=
- Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option), Thomas Huth, 2020/01/07
- Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option), Christophe de Dinechin, 2020/01/07
- Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option), Peter Maydell, 2020/01/07
- Re: Priority of -accel (was: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Update tests to recent desugarized -accel option), Kevin Wolf, 2020/01/08
- Re: Priority of -accel, Markus Armbruster, 2020/01/13
- Re: Priority of -accel, Paolo Bonzini, 2020/01/13
- Re: Priority of -accel, Markus Armbruster, 2020/01/14
- Re: Priority of -accel, Paolo Bonzini, 2020/01/14
- Re: Priority of -accel, Christophe de Dinechin, 2020/01/14
- Re: Priority of -accel, Daniel P . Berrangé, 2020/01/14