On 21/05/13 14:04, Anthony Liguori wrote:
"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange(a)redhat.com> writes:
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 07:55:27PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 09:39:53AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> QEMU has the notion of a default machine for each target, and that is
>>> what libvirt uses if the user hasn't specified a machine. It is not
>>> libvirt's job to override QEMU's notion of the default machine here,
>>> so if the 'mac99' machine type isn't suitable as the default
either
>>> QEMU needs to change that for the ppc target, or the user needs to
>>> explicitly specify their desired machine type.
>>
>> We are getting the default changed to 'pseries', at least for cases
>> where pseries support is compiled in, which isn't necessarily
>> always. That will of course not satisfy the Freescale guys.
>>
>> I think libvirt needs some more sensible way to ask qemu what its
>> capabilities are. Currently it has no way to ask qemu "what machines
>> can you emulate with kvm acceleration?" If the user has asked for a
>> KVM domain then the default machine should be one that can be provided
>> by KVM. At present it isn't, on PowerPC.
>
> If QEMU can provide more intelligent info in this respect, then
> libvirt can use it. We're doing the best we can with picking
> defaults given the info QEMU currently provides us.
We've talked in the past about having an accelerator specific machine
default. I think this is a perfectly reasonable thing to do and would
solve the problem for ARM and for PPC.
If we get such thing, then virtio-ccw might also be the right default for kvm
on s390.
Christian