From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: john cooper Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add definitions for current cpu models.. Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:09:53 -0500 Message-ID: <4B576311.3030906@redhat.com> References: <4B549016.6090501@redhat.com> <4B560A88.9@codemonkey.ws> <20100119200349.GG3204@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <4B563144.9030803@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Chris Wright , "Przywara, Andre" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, KVM list , john.cooper@redhat.com To: Anthony Liguori Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:3140 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751258Ab0ATUOP (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:14:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B563144.9030803@codemonkey.ws> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 01/19/2010 02:03 PM, Chris Wright wrote: >> * Anthony Liguori (anthony@codemonkey.ws) wrote: >> >>> I'm very much against having -cpu Nehalem. The whole point of this is >>> to make things easier for a user and for most of the users I've >>> encountered, -cpu Nehalem is just as obscure as -cpu >>> qemu64,-sse3,+vmx,... >>> >> What name will these users know? FWIW, it makes sense to me as it is. >> > > Whatever is in /proc/cpuinfo. $ grep name /proc/cpuinfo model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz Which is detailing that exact cpu vs. the class of which it is a member. So are you suggesting to map all instances of processors called out in /proc/cpuinfo into one of the three defined models? We can certainly do that however I was looking for a more terse and simplified solution at this level while deferring more ornate mapping schemes to management tools. Still at the user facing CLI this doesn't strike me as the most friendly encoding of a -cpu . -john -- john.cooper@redhat.com