[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] spapr: Use DeviceClass::fw_na

From: Alexey Kardashevskiy
Subject: Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/4] spapr: Use DeviceClass::fw_name for device tree CPU node
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 23:53:00 +1000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7

On 08/30/2013 11:26 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 30.08.2013 15:21, schrieb Alexander Graf:
>> On 16.08.2013, at 00:35, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>> Instead of relying on cpu_model, obtain the device tree node label
>>> per CPU. Use DeviceClass::fw_name when available. This implicitly
>>> resolves address@hidden node labels for those CPUs through inheritance.
>>> Whenever DeviceClass::fw_name is not available, derive it from the CPU's
>>> type name and fill it in for that class with a "PowerPC," prefix for
>>> PAPR compliance.
>> Could we just mandate the fw_name field to always be set for all classes 
>> instead?
> Sure, we can assert it. But we would then need to set fw_name for the
> various 970 families at least, which I have been using with pseries in
> the past. Cell and POWER6 are TODO so I'm not concerned about them. Not
> sure about RS64 that Alexey mentioned - I wouldn't be able to test.
> Would be bad to regress and abort with CPU models that were working okay
> before.

If we generated fw_name as it would have been done by the current helpers,
how would anything regress?


reply via email to

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