[Engine-devel] host cpu feature

[Doron Fediuck]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak at redhat.com>
> To: "Doron Fediuck" <dfediuck at redhat.com>
> Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2012 7:14:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] host cpu feature
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Doron Fediuck" <dfediuck at redhat.com>
> > To: "Yaniv Kaul" <ykaul at redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Laszlo Hornyak" <lhornyak at redhat.com>, "engine-devel"
> > <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2012 6:10:55 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] host cpu feature
> > 
> > > Alternative idea, inspired by "Thus, if you hit any bugs, you are
> > > on
> > > your own" (http://libvirt.org/formatdomain.html#elementsCPU wrt
> > > 'host-passthrough'):
> > > A config option to determine if we use host-model or
> > > host-passthrough.
> > > Y.
> > > 
> > 
> > I do not think the engine should go to this level.
> > ie- it can ask for passthrough as a feature, and the
> > actual implementation is handled by vdsm.
> > 
> 
> If vdsm decides over host-passthrough or host-model, then how will
> the engine user know what exactly his VM gets. I think vdsm must be
> told exactly what to do.
> 

VDSM maintains some level of independence. This is why it the engine
should be able to ask for passthrough as a feature. Otherwize vdsm will
handle it. So for now I suggest we stick to passthrough only, and if
we get an RFE for advanced mode we'll support the host model.