Re: [Qemu-devel] release retrospective, next release timing, numbering

[Daniel P . Berrangé]

On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 01:05:21PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 2 May 2018 at 12:58, Daniel P. Berrangé <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I'm curious what is the compelling benefit of having a single fat QEMU
> > binary that included all archiectures at once ?
> 
> The motivation is "I want to model a board with an SoC that has
> both Arm cores and Microblaze cores". One binary seems the most
> sensible way to do that, since otherwise we'd end up with some
> huge multiplication of binaries for all the possible architecture
> combinations. It also would reduce the number of times we end up
> recompiling and shipping any particular PCI device. From the
> perspective of QEMU as emulation environment, it's a nice
> simplification.

Ah that's interesting - should have known there was wierd hardware
like that out there :-)   So from that POV, it would be good to
try to aim for making the CPU emulation loadable modules to avoid
degrading our current level of modularization.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|