qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] Fixing Snowridge CPU model name and features


From: Eduardo Habkost
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Fixing Snowridge CPU model name and features
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2019 13:04:34 -0300

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 04:46:01PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 at 16:42, Bruce Rogers <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2019-07-16 at 08:58 -0700, Paul Lai wrote:
> > > Changing the name to Snowridge from SnowRidge-Server.
> > > There is no client model of Snowridge, so "-Server" is unnecessary.
> > >
> > > Removing CPUID_EXT_VMX from Snowridge cpu feature list.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Paul Lai <address@hidden>
> > > Tested-by: Tao3 Xu <address@hidden>
> > > ---
> > >  target/i386/cpu.c | 3 +--
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/target/i386/cpu.c b/target/i386/cpu.c
> > > index 63d89276fe..7f56e887ae 100644
> > > --- a/target/i386/cpu.c
> > > +++ b/target/i386/cpu.c
> > > @@ -2688,7 +2688,7 @@ static X86CPUDefinition builtin_x86_defs[] = {
> > >          .model_id = "Intel Xeon Processor (Icelake)",
> > >      },
> > >      {
> > > -        .name = "SnowRidge-Server",
> > > +        .name = "Snowridge",
> > >          .level = 27,
> > >          .vendor = CPUID_VENDOR_INTEL,
> > >          .family = 6,
> > > @@ -2706,7 +2706,6 @@ static X86CPUDefinition builtin_x86_defs[] = {
> > >              CPUID_FXSR | CPUID_SSE | CPUID_SSE2,
> > >          .features[FEAT_1_ECX] =
> > >              CPUID_EXT_SSE3 | CPUID_EXT_PCLMULQDQ | CPUID_EXT_MONITOR
> > > |
> > > -            CPUID_EXT_VMX |
> > >              CPUID_EXT_SSSE3 |
> > >              CPUID_EXT_CX16 |
> > >              CPUID_EXT_SSE41 |
> >
> > What is the status of this patch with respect to the v4.1.0 release?
> > It would seem to me that it was targeted for this release, to get the
> > name and features right before codified in a released version, but
> > Intel would know better.
> 
> If nobody picks it up this afternoon then it has (probably) missed the boat.
> Not ccing any of the target/i386 maintainers or putting "for-4.1"
> in the subject line is probably why it got missed. Eduardo/Paolo/Richard ?

I'll pick it and send a pull request ASAP.

-- 
Eduardo



reply via email to

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