Il 25/11/2014 08:37, Francesco Romani ha scritto:
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sandro Bonazzola" <sbonazzo(a)redhat.com>
> To: Users(a)ovirt.org, devel(a)ovirt.org
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:07:14 AM
> Subject: [ovirt-users] [QE][ACTION REQUIRED] oVirt 3.5.1 RC status - postponed
[...]
> The following bugs have been keyworded as Regression and not marked as
> blockers:
> 1165336 virt ASSIGNED FC20 qemu needs kvmclock bugfixes
Hi,
I'd like to elaborate a bit more here for the sake of the openness.
TL;DR version
- no actual regression in oVirt, meaning 'we applied a patch and we broke
something'.
- "fix" is underway - to propose the relevant patches to Fedora QEMU package
Long(ish) version
1 some time ago we adhered to QEMU/KVM clock settings recommendations (see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1053846)
2 these recommendations are *still* valid as today - I just checked with upstream
developers
while investigating bz1165336
3 these recommendations may have surprising effects like disabling HPET clock
4 on some old(ish) upstream QEMUs, disabling HPET may hurt migrations - hence bz1165336
5 only *very* recent QEMUs (2.2.0rc0!) have the fixes, which are about improving
kvm clock, while HPET clock is still not recommended (see #2 above)
6 if the qemu-kvm-rhev is used (available in the oVirt repo), the experience is
significantly better
However, the reporter *has* a very valid point, which motivated me to write me this
mail:
a. F20 is a supported platform
b. I *guess* Fedora is the platform of choice to try out QEMU and to initially play with
it
c. out-of-the box experience with oVirt and Fedora is cumbersome, many steps and tunings
are needed.
This may annoy users - without a valid reason!
Can you detail the "many steps and tunings are needed"?
I just install Fedora 20 and oVirt 3.5 snapshot and it usually just works...
d. hence there is an unneededly high first step to try out oVirt, and
this is hurting the project
Now, I'd like to raise this question
* it is true that Fedora is the platform of choice to try out and evaluate oVirt?
* if so, is the experience on Fedora streamlined enough or could it made simple, hence we
could
have a better vector to spread oVirt?
* what we could do, as oVirt project, to improve the above?
Feedback welcome
--
Sandro Bonazzola
Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at
redhat.com