Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 82885 - Qemu ebuild should include support for accelerator (USE flag?)
Summary: Qemu ebuild should include support for accelerator (USE flag?)
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: x86 All
: High enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Luca Barbato
: 90668 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Reported: 2005-02-21 15:14 UTC by Antti Mäkelä
Modified: 2005-07-25 22:36 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---

qemu- (qemu-,1.52 KB, patch)
2005-04-05 07:53 UTC, Chris Bainbridge (RETIRED)
Details | Diff
qvm86-20050405.tar.bz2 (qvm86-20050405.tar.bz2,26.65 KB, application/octet-stream)
2005-04-05 07:54 UTC, Chris Bainbridge (RETIRED)
qemu- (newpatch,2.72 KB, patch)
2005-04-06 11:02 UTC, Chris Bainbridge (RETIRED)
Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Antti Mäkelä 2005-02-21 15:14:18 UTC
Comment 1 Antti Mäkelä 2005-02-21 15:16:30 UTC
As noted by Slashdot in, qemu ebuild should include possibility to use qemu accelerator module (on x86 arch). Due to licensing issues, the modules should probably be set to manual download (Fetch). Module only works with qemu's CVS version.
Comment 2 Luca Barbato gentoo-dev 2005-02-21 15:44:33 UTC
I already contacted the author and I got the permission to have kqemu distributed within gentoo.

Once the qemu-0.6.2 is release (due some days I think) you could have the qemu + kqemu just issuing:

USE=kqemu emerge -u qemu
Comment 3 @4u 2005-03-17 23:29:16 UTC
I've build qemu directly from CVS sources and it's working fine with kqemu.

Because of license issues I recommend to use an USE flag "kqemu" for example and to set manual fetch restriction for the kqemu binary.

The "kqemu" USE flag should be ignored, if the host computer isn't an x86-compatible (including 64bit).
Comment 4 Luca Barbato gentoo-dev 2005-03-18 01:26:57 UTC
Please have a look at my public overlay on
Comment 5 Chris Bainbridge (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-04-05 07:53:49 UTC
Created attachment 55365 [details, diff]

Luca, here's a patch for your current overlay ebuild. The changes:

1) CFLAGS are filtered rather than unset. (we dont compile with -g)
2) Supports QVM86, the GPLed kernel accelerator. See the announcement 2 days
ago here

I'm currently up and running with QVM86 and everything is working well.
Comment 6 Chris Bainbridge (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-04-05 07:54:42 UTC
Created attachment 55366 [details]

Since theres no release of qvm86 yet, heres a CVS snapshot.
Comment 7 Luca Barbato gentoo-dev 2005-04-05 08:06:16 UTC
I just lurk the qemu ml and I know about the qvm86 but I didn't test it yet.
The idea of supporting both looks fine, could you please send me a diff -u of your changes so I could update the snapshot ebuild.

If enough users want it I could think about adding a p.masked snapshot in the tree.
Comment 8 Chris Bainbridge (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-04-06 01:40:27 UTC
The ebuild diff is already attached as qemu-

A new ebuild in portage would be good.. it's always a pain having to find a bug report and download ebuilds. Anyway, the sooner people find problems, the sooner they'll be fixed! :)
Comment 9 Luca Barbato gentoo-dev 2005-04-06 07:15:57 UTC
diff -u is usable by patch and easyer to understand than plain diff...

experimental ebuild  usually stay in the developer devspace, so people interested can just poll those pages.

I hope to have the time to get something in portage tomorrow.
Comment 10 Chris Bainbridge (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-04-06 11:02:42 UTC
Created attachment 55506 [details, diff]

unified diff patch
Comment 11 Luca Barbato gentoo-dev 2005-04-09 13:53:21 UTC
I have an updated ebuild to the today snapshot but isn't working well
If there is someone willing to have it (qvm86 and qemu snapshots + ebuild) just asks.

I'll keep unsetting CFLAGS. 
Comment 12 Antti Mäkelä 2005-04-13 06:52:11 UTC
Tested the ebuild and works ok. One thing that seems to be missing though is an udev permission that gives the /dev/kqemu more lenient rights (maybe 660 with group users). Now if I modprobe kqemu the device is root-only.

I hope they release final qemu-0.6.2 soon...
Comment 13 Luca Barbato gentoo-dev 2005-04-13 09:41:04 UTC
Probably I'll add an udev rule for it (to set it for the wheel group) if you have other ideas about that feel free to tell me
Comment 14 Antti Mäkelä 2005-04-13 13:54:42 UTC
IMHO the wheel group is *only* for allowing su command, and should not be used for anything else. If you're thinking that allowing all "users" group to access the device is a bad idea and no existing groups seem to fill it (perhaps "video" or "tty" or even "games") then maybe you could just create a new group like "qemuvm" that would cover all (2 at the moment) qemu virtualizer kernel modules.

  Anyway, wheels role should not be expanded from pointing out users who can upgrade to root permissions.
Comment 15 Antti Mäkelä 2005-04-28 01:41:29 UTC
Qemu 0.7.0 is out! Please include into portage tree :)
Comment 16 Luca Barbato gentoo-dev 2005-04-28 03:05:58 UTC
Let me test it today
Comment 17 Luca Barbato gentoo-dev 2005-04-28 05:07:28 UTC
*** Bug 90668 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 18 Luca Barbato gentoo-dev 2005-04-28 06:36:56 UTC
ebuild committed, qvm86 got removed pending release or stabilization (and a way to make it build in non exclusive way)
Comment 19 Antti Mäkelä 2005-04-28 09:39:42 UTC
Apparently you left out the udev permission rule. For me, adding


to the rules is ok, but you might try something like


or even create a new group like "qemuvm" for this and say

pkg_preinst() {
        enewgroup qemuvm

in the ebuild and add appropriately to udev permissions..
Comment 20 Luca Barbato gentoo-dev 2005-04-28 11:33:36 UTC
you are right! I'll add something soon 
Comment 21 jannis 2005-07-06 02:32:19 UTC
contains a patch and a new ebuild which fixes a function-renaming-issue with
kernels newer than 2.6.12-git4
Comment 22 Luca Barbato gentoo-dev 2005-07-25 22:36:23 UTC
That's not the right place to discuss the issue. Thank you for the headup anyway
(better a relatively redundant information that no information)