Re: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] Modern CPU models cannot be used with libvirt

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 02:03:21PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 01:59:05PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: >> On 03/26/2012 01:24 PM, Jiri Denemark wrote: >>> ... >>>>> The command line becomes unstable if you use -nodefconfig. >>>> >>>> -no-user-config solves this but I fully expect libvirt would continue to use >>>> -nodefconfig. >>> >>> Libvirt uses -nodefaults -nodefconfig because it wants to fully control how >>> the virtual machine will look like (mainly in terms of devices). In other >>> words, we don't want any devices to just magically appear without libvirt >>> knowing about them. -nodefaults gets rid of default devices that are built >>> directly in qemu. Since users can set any devices or command line options >>> (such as enable-kvm) into qemu configuration files in @SYSCONFDIR@, we need to >>> avoid reading those files as well. Hence we use -nodefconfig. However, we >>> would still like qemu to read CPU definitions, machine types, etc. once they >>> become externally loaded configuration (or however we decide to call it). That >>> said, when CPU definitions are moved into @DATADIR@, and -no-user-config is >>> introduced, I don't see any reason for libvirt to keep using -nodefconfig. ACK. >>> >>> I actually like >>> -no-user-config >>> more than >>> -nodefconfig -readconfig @DATADIR@/... >>> since it would avoid additional magic to detect what files libvirt should >>> explicitly pass to -readconfig but basically any approach that would allow us >>> to do read files only from @DATADIR@ is much better than what we have with >>> -nodefconfig now. >> >> That's how I see it as well. >> > +1 > > except that instead of -no-user-config we can do what most other > programs do. If config file is specified during invocation default one > is not used. After implementing -no-user-config (or similar) we can drop > -nodefconfig entirely since its only user will be gone it its semantics > is not clear. Awesome. It looks like we have a solution now? Anthony, do you agree with that? Daniel, it looks good for you?