[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] hw/arm: Add Arm Enterprise machine type

From: Hongbo Zhang
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] hw/arm: Add Arm Enterprise machine type
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 17:17:56 +0800

On 25 July 2018 at 17:13, Ard Biesheuvel <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 25 July 2018 at 11:09, Hongbo Zhang <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On 25 July 2018 at 17:01, Ard Biesheuvel <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> On 25 July 2018 at 10:48, Daniel P. Berrangé <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 01:30:52PM +0800, Hongbo Zhang wrote:
>>>>> For the Aarch64, there is one machine 'virt', it is primarily meant to
>>>>> run on KVM and execute virtualization workloads, but we need an
>>>>> environment as faithful as possible to physical hardware, for supporting
>>>>> firmware and OS development for pysical Aarch64 machines.
>>>>> This patch introduces new machine type 'Enterprise' with main features:
>>>> The 'enterprise' name is really awful - this is essentially a marketing
>>>> term completely devoid of any useful meaning.
>>>> You had previously called this "sbsa" which IIUC was related to a real
>>>> world hardware specification that it was based on. IOW, I think this old
>>>> name was preferrable to calling it "enterprise".
>>> I couldn't agree more. However, IIUC this change was made at the
>>> request of one of the reviewers, although I wasn't part of the
>>> discussion at that point, so I'm not sure who it was.
>>> Hongbo, could you please share a link to that discussion?
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ard.
>> V1 discussion here:
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/address@hidden/msg545775.html
> So who asked for the sbsa -> enterprise change?

Actually nobody, but it was argued that sbsa does not require ehci and
ahci etc, then we should find a name fitting for this platform better.

reply via email to

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