From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for 2012-11-12
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:29:37 +0100
Message-ID: <50A25951.7090602@suse.de>
References: <87ip9bc70h.fsf@trasno.org> <20121113122955.GI8231@otherpad.lan.raisama.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Cc: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
	KVM devel mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	qemu-devel qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>,
	Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>
To: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:57966 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752973Ab2KMOaB (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 13 Nov 2012 09:30:01 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20121113122955.GI8231@otherpad.lan.raisama.net>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Am 13.11.2012 13:29, schrieb Eduardo Habkost:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 01:58:38PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>
>> Please send in any agenda topics you are interested in.
>=20
> - Clarify 1.3 plans for CPU:

=46rom my submaintainer POV:

> DeviceState CPU,

I was specifically tasked with the qdev split by Anthony, so unless
major obstacles arise I will send a PULL until Thursday.

What I am still unsure about is whether it makes sense to actually appl=
y
the final CPU-as-device change for v1.3 since that exposes the device
name(s) as public "ABI", cf. below. A safety option would be no_user =3D=
 1
to avoid users messing with untested use cases at this time.

> x86 CPU classes,

If I get through review quickly enough and RFC seems sane and I get a
PATCH, I might include it in the pull. To me, classes are prerequisites
to exposing CPU-as-a-device because otherwise the user specifies the
base class that we want to make abstract (which will then break
backwards compatibility) and has no API to set it to something useful.
Once applied, we would still have half a month for testing.

> x86 CPU properties

Won't make v1.3 due to timing constraints. There are also still
unresolved review comments related to property naming IIRC.

>   (we still want to get any of this included, or all will have to wai=
t for 1.4?)

Regards,
Andreas

--=20
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend=F6rffer; HRB 16746 AG N=FCrn=
berg