[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [QEMU PATCH 0/3] versioned CPU models / per-machine-typ

From: Andreas Färber
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [QEMU PATCH 0/3] versioned CPU models / per-machine-type aliases
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 16:06:03 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120601 Thunderbird/13.0

Am 26.07.2012 15:53, schrieb Eduardo Habkost:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 06:43:25PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden> writes:
>>> Hi,
>>> This is the first try at a simple system to make the CPU model definitions
>>> versioned (to allow them to get bug fixes while allowing migration from 
>>> older
>>> versions and keeping command-line compatibility), and per- machine-type 
>>> aliases
>>> for compatibility.
>>> The lack of CPU model versioning is blocking multiple bug fixes that are
>>> necessary on CPU model definitions, but can't be included today because they
>>> would break migration.
>>> Later, after this gets in (or at least gets some feedback), I plan to send a
>>> proposal for a machine-friendly CPU feature / CPU model probing interface 
>>> that
>>> libvirt could use.
>> This isn't the right approach.  The CPU properties should be exposed as
>> QOM properties which then allows the machine type globals to be used to
>> control stuff like this.
> I would like to use global properties for this, but the obstacles I have
> found were:
> - As far as I can see in the code, global properties are usable only by
>   qdev objects, and CPUs were not qdevfied yet

After Hackweek I plan to put together some compromise or even multiple
alternatives. We definitely need this for multiple open issues.

> - The per-machine-type properties I need to set are for CPU models, not
>   CPUs.
>   - For example: if we fix the Nehalem CPU model by changing the "level"
>     field, we need to make the pc-1.1 and lower machine-types to keep
>     the old "level" value, but only on the Nehalem CPU model

Is that part crying for CPU subclasses? Or what is the problem there?
(Still have a mail about -cpudef in my drafts folder, need to post RFC.)


SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]