From: "Hanson, Seth" via <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Adding New, Unsupported ISA to Qemu
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 21:23:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1572988990478.74192@sandia.gov> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA_5ZS=4gHW8yph_o7Z4XrO5r2YMbGTB0oNtQKriv-qS=A@mail.gmail.com>
Gentlemen,
Thank you for your input.
Peter,
I completely understand your concern. Rest assured, this project is entirely internal and requires no code contribution, unit testing, etc. from QEMU devs. We simply want to garner as much documentation as possible to ensure optimal conversion/compatibility. My team and I have already completed a majority of our instruction set mapping into TCG. Lately however, we've encountered issues with floating point operations.
I noticed in the TCG Readme that floating point operations are no longer officially supported but were previously (per the last paragraph in 4.1).
Can you please provide documentation for implementing the latter?
Regards,
Seth
________________________________________
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 1:55 PM
To: Stefan Hajnoczi
Cc: Hanson, Seth; qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Adding New, Unsupported ISA to Qemu
On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 at 16:44, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com> wrote
> The general advice I've seen is:
>
> 1. Look at existing TCG targets to learn how to implement aspects of
> your ISA.
...and *don't* look at older/less maintained targets (including
x86), as they have a lot of bad habits you don't want to copy.
Using 'decodetree' is probably a good idea.
> 2. If you are unfamiliar with emulation, CPU ISA, or just-in-time
> compiler concepts, try to read up on them and then look back at the
> QEMU code. Things will be clearer.
I would also add
3. Don't expect getting this implemented and upstream to be easy.
(Apologies if the following sounds pessimistic and off-putting;
but I would prefer people to have a clear understanding of
what they're getting into and not assume the chances of
success are higher than they might actually be.)
"New TCG target" is an unlucky combination of:
(1) it's quite a lot of work in pure amount-of-code terms
(2) because it is a big feature it is not a good choice as a "first
contribution to the project", but new targets often are proposed
and written by people who don't have any previous history of
writing QEMU code
(3) we already have targets for the common CPU ISAs, so
anything new is likely to be obscure and not have many people
who care about it either in our userbase or in our dev community.
(riscv is the obvious recent exception here, as it is clearly relevant
as a new architecture and has attracted multiple people to work
on it and contribute both code and reviews)
1 and 2 mean that code review of a new TCG target is a lot
of work, and 3 means it's not clear how much return the project
gets for that investment :-(
There is not a large community of upstream developers who are
interested in maintaining a lot of obscure guest architectures:
we essentially rely on the goodwill and not-entirely-work-time
of just a few people when it comes to reviewing new TCG targets.
That means that patchsets often hang around on list for a long
time without getting attention.
Our past historical experience has often been that when people
contribute TCG targets, we do a lot of work on our end with
code review and helping to get the code into upstream QEMU, and
then these people more or less disappear, leaving us with the
burden of something we have to support and no help doing it.
If in general people submitting new TCG targets were all
*helping each other*, passing on what they learned to the
next person along, contributing code review, updating older
code as QEMU APIs improve/churn, etc, then I think I'd feel
differently about this. But to be honest mostly I find myself
thinking "oh dear, not another one".
We already have two new TCG ports with patches on list
which are kind of stalled due to not having enough existing
upstream QEMU devs who can/will code review them (and
another which hasn't had patches posted but might do soon).
The odds for your new port having a happier future don't seem
too great to me :-(
thanks
-- PMM
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-05 21:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-04 23:50 Adding New, Unsupported ISA to Qemu Hanson, Seth via
2019-11-05 9:51 ` Alex Bennée
2019-11-05 16:42 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-11-05 20:55 ` Peter Maydell
2019-11-05 21:23 ` Hanson, Seth via [this message]
2019-11-05 21:39 ` [EXTERNAL] " Peter Maydell
2019-11-05 23:45 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2019-11-05 21:15 ` Palmer Dabbelt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1572988990478.74192@sandia.gov \
--to=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=shanson@sandia.gov \
--cc=stefanha@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.