From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 106A7EB28D1 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2026 06:59:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1voFnw-0003Gz-Kf; Fri, 06 Feb 2026 01:59:00 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1voFns-0003G3-Tb for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2026 01:58:57 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1voFnq-0004TJ-Oz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2026 01:58:56 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1770361130; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=bTsMdXFQk+VFsm05EPjTFeASJq6gTlU22DM97NGMsVY=; b=LWkF8jf+bJxtK/T9gPqaLi6xjcGZNkbxTvtbq/VUOLX5aop+kA8qAcDWOiCLOhrMwjlbwz tUl9+2/t6ApnLXL5b/lBijfr/ZrGa1cGvJPowioLUl1zcGrshvZYPV1EUjvU103vSMEwc8 aPCBciinxW5jvAtxunfA9c3T8mAu818= Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-204-_pXxCrGENWGffwy_PiK_Tg-1; Fri, 06 Feb 2026 01:58:46 -0500 X-MC-Unique: _pXxCrGENWGffwy_PiK_Tg-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: _pXxCrGENWGffwy_PiK_Tg_1770361125 Received: from mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.17]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BCB41800451; Fri, 6 Feb 2026 06:58:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (unknown [10.45.242.22]) by mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04FA319373D8; Fri, 6 Feb 2026 06:58:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8522121E692D; Fri, 06 Feb 2026 07:58:42 +0100 (CET) From: Markus Armbruster To: Richard Henderson Cc: Pierrick Bouvier , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= , Brian Cain , =?utf-8?Q?Daniel_P=2E_Berrang=C3=A9?= Subject: Renaming targets (was: [PATCH] target-info: set target_arch statically) In-Reply-To: <6ddad25a-192c-4b5a-80fc-b006436810a2@linaro.org> (Richard Henderson's message of "Fri, 6 Feb 2026 08:36:14 +1000") References: <20260203194113.3026757-1-pierrick.bouvier@linaro.org> <7645fcac-c4b2-4a9f-91c8-4990e9c92ef9@linaro.org> <5fd0062c-b474-4971-9a46-06af9ae4e0c7@linaro.org> <877bsr34au.fsf@pond.sub.org> <6ddad25a-192c-4b5a-80fc-b006436810a2@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2026 07:58:42 +0100 Message-ID: <878qd6xsrh.fsf_-_@pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.17 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: qemu development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Richard Henderson writes: > On 2/5/26 19:52, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> I assume the qapi string is the one that should take precedence; everyt= hing else appears to be merely qemu source level strings. Marcus, can you = confirm? >>=20 >> What exactly would you like me to confirm? >>=20 >> I *guess* it's about the messy part of the patch you posted upthread. >> There, you have to normalize TARGET_ARCH value 'openrisc' to 'or1k'. > > Yes. I wanted you to confirm that changing the string in qapi is a non-s= tarter, therefore=20 > 'or1k' is the string we should standardize on. Yes, changing enum value @or1k is problematic. Enum SysEmuTarget is visible in QMP: query-target return member @arch, query-cpus-fast return member @target. These are stable interfaces. I can see two ways to change the enum value to @openrisc: 1. We create a new qemu-system-openrisc, identical to qemu-system-or1k except for the target name. We deprecate qemu-system-or1k and SysEmuTarget member @or1k, and remove them after the grace period. I doubt it's worth the bother. 2. We cheat: we rename with the excuse that the target is bottom support tier, and our compatibility promise doesn't apply there. I don't think that's a good idea. If we want to qualify our compatibility promise with tiers, we better define the tiers and what they mean for the promise *first*. Related: From: Daniel P. Berrang=C3=A9 Subject: [PATCH] docs/about: propose OS platform/arch support tiers Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 18:01:23 +0000 Message-ID: <20260115180123.848640-1-berrange@redhat.com> https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20260115180123.848640-1-berrange@red= hat.com/ >> I figure this is about adding 'hexagon' to SysEmuTarget even though it's >> not actually a system emulator target now. >>=20 >> The fact that adding it there helps indicates SysEmuTarget has leaked >> into user emulators, and its name has become misleading. Is this true? > > Yes. The target_info structure is used for both user and system, and one= of these fields=20 > is the SysEmuTarget entry. Then SysEmuTarget has become misleading. We *can* fix that: QAPI type names are not part of the external interface by design.