Feature #11555

Document KVM configuration for better graphic performance

Added by emmapeel 2016-07-01 13:25:15 . Updated 2018-01-17 16:12:59 .

Status:
Rejected
Priority:
Low
Assignee:
emmapeel
Category:
Virtualization
Target version:
Start date:
2016-07-01
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Feature Branch:
Type of work:
End-user documentation
Blueprint:

Starter:
1
Affected tool:
Deliverable for:

Description

We could add some more information to
https://tails.boum.org/doc/advanced_topics/virtualization/virt-manager/

The only KVM config in which I’ve seen acceptable graphics performance is QXL with lots of video memory (starting with Tails 2.4, as before it was hopeless).


Subtasks


Related issues

Related to Tails - Bug #14786: Can't change resolution under KVM with QXL Resolved 2017-10-04

History

#1 Updated by emmapeel 2016-07-01 13:25:42

  • Description updated

#2 Updated by intrigeri 2016-07-16 05:44:35

> The only KVM config in which I’ve seen acceptable graphics performance is QXL with lots of video memory (starting with Tails 2.4, as before it was hopeless).

That would be 2.5, not 2.4.

#3 Updated by sajolida 2016-11-04 12:39:41

  • QA Check deleted (Dev Needed)

#4 Updated by Anonymous 2017-06-30 13:32:16

  • Assignee set to emmapeel
  • QA Check set to Info Needed

What kind of information should we add there emmapeel?

#5 Updated by Anonymous 2018-01-17 14:48:50

ping?

#6 Updated by emmapeel 2018-01-17 15:30:18

u wrote:
> ping?

No idea, some nice information to boot with KVM. Document it better.

#7 Updated by Anonymous 2018-01-17 15:48:07

  • related to Bug #14786: Can't change resolution under KVM with QXL added

#8 Updated by intrigeri 2018-01-17 15:49:16

emmapeel wrote:
> u wrote:
> > ping?
>
> No idea, some nice information to boot with KVM. Document it better.

Better than what I’ve added in the “Troubleshooting” section of https://tails.boum.org/doc/advanced_topics/virtualization/virt-manager/, or better than the “nothing at all” we had previously?

#9 Updated by Anonymous 2018-01-17 16:12:59

  • Status changed from Confirmed to Rejected

IMO intrigeri’s work on Bug #14786 addresses the issue. If it doesn’t just reopen this ticket.