On Wed, 2015-01-21 at 09:42 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 04:00:52PM +0800, Zhu Guihua wrote:
> > If you apply the folowing patchset
> > [PATCH v3 0/7] cpu: add device_add foo-x86_64-cpu support
> >
https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-01/msg01552.html,
> > and [PATCH v2 00/11] cpu: add i386 cpu hot remove support
> >
https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-01/msg01557.html,
> > qemu can support hotplug and hot-unplug cpu device.
> >
> > So this patch series will make libvirt support hotplug and hot-unplug cpu
> > device for qemu driver, and now only supports one cpu driver which is
> > 'qemu64-x86_64-cpu'.
> >
> > The cpu device's xml like this:
> > <cpu driver='qemu64-x86_64-cpu' apic_id='3'>
>
> Do we really need to expose this 'qemu64-x86_64-cpu' string to apps.
> It feels like a rather low level QEMU private implementation detail
> to me that apps should not need to know or care about. I think libvirt
> should always just do the right thing to make cpu hotplug work.
>
There is a need to use more cpu model.
'qemu64-x86_64-cpu' is only one example, we will realize more driver in
future.
Can you give an example of why we will need more than one model ? It seems
pretty crazy to me that we will need to specify two CPU models for CPUs,
both "Nehalem" / "Opteron" / etc and this new CPU model. It makes
little
sense from the user / app POV IMHO.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: