On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 11:45:31AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 22/06/2015 10:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Given that support is known to be partial, would it make sense to keep it disabled by default for 2.4?
What is partial about it?
Ow, looks like I didn't send out the response to the patch itself. Will do.
In fact, considering that q35 behavior is still experimental it makes no sense to even make it conditional.
I agree to this, though an option to disable seems useful for debugging, so I'm glad that Paulo implemented it. It's probably not strictly required to disable for old machine types, but why not.
We discussed this on IRC and I was hoping to hear you reply "sorry, I was wrong". Instead, I get this.
Michael, I'm seriously getting annoyed by this behavior. Stop scaring away contributors.
Doing my best here, but I do think we need to be careful about merging things at this stage to avoid delaying the release.
This way in 2.5 we won't need to add more flags to stay bug compatible.