[PATCH v1] qemu: monitor: substitute missing model name for host-passthrough

Michal Privoznik mprivozn at redhat.com
Wed Sep 16 07:03:43 UTC 2020

On 9/15/20 10:25 PM, Collin Walling wrote:
> One more ping in attempt to get this in the right direction. Otherwise
> I'll post my next idea and we can go from there :)

I agree with Peter that while the idea might look correct it's too deep.

> Thinking about this issue, should a host-passthough CPU definition be
> permitted for the baseline & comparison commands? The model represented
> under this mode is not considered migration safe and it may make sense
> to simply fail early since these commands aim to construct/determine a
> migratable CPU model, respectively.

Honestly, I don't know much about this CPU models area, but is that true 
even for two identical hosts? Say I have two desktops next to each 
other, with the same CPU and I want to migrate. I could use host model, 
couldn't I?

> Perhaps if a host-passthrough CPU is detected, then an error reporting
> something along the lines of "host-passthrough is not supported for
> migration" would be sufficient for this?
> Thanks again. Hope all is well.


More information about the libvir-list mailing list