Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host()

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host()

[Eduardo Habkost]

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:41:07PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> Resend of series submitted on 24 November 2013, that didn't get any reply. Only
> change is a trivial conflict on patch 7/7.

Question: which tree is the most appropriate to get this in? qom-cpu?
kvm?


> 
> This series simplifies kvm_cpu_fill_host() and
> kvm_check_features_against_host() to simply use FeatureWord & feature_word_info
> loops to fill/check feature words.
> 
> The initial motivation for this was to avoid hacks involving the "host" CPU
> class on the forthcoming conversion of CPU models to be X86CPU subclasses.
> Instead of requiring the kvm_arch_get_supported_cpuid() results to be stored in
> the class struct for "host" (thus requiring KVM initialization hacks).
> 
> Eduardo Habkost (7):
>   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): Kill unused code
>   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): No need to check level
>   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): No need to check CPU vendor
>   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): No need to check xlevel2
>   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): Set all feature words at end of
>     function
>   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): Fill feature words in a loop
>   target-i386: kvm_check_features_against_host(): Kill feature word
>     array
> 
>  target-i386/cpu.c | 89 +++++++++++++------------------------------------------
>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 1.8.4.2
> 
> 

-- 
Eduardo

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host()

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 04:36:56PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:41:07PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > Resend of series submitted on 24 November 2013, that didn't get any reply. Only
> > change is a trivial conflict on patch 7/7.
> 
> Question: which tree is the most appropriate to get this in? qom-cpu?
> kvm?

Either kvm or my pc tree.
Seems unrelated to qom.
Paolo - want to review and take this?

> 
> > 
> > This series simplifies kvm_cpu_fill_host() and
> > kvm_check_features_against_host() to simply use FeatureWord & feature_word_info
> > loops to fill/check feature words.
> > 
> > The initial motivation for this was to avoid hacks involving the "host" CPU
> > class on the forthcoming conversion of CPU models to be X86CPU subclasses.
> > Instead of requiring the kvm_arch_get_supported_cpuid() results to be stored in
> > the class struct for "host" (thus requiring KVM initialization hacks).
> > 
> > Eduardo Habkost (7):
> >   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): Kill unused code
> >   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): No need to check level
> >   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): No need to check CPU vendor
> >   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): No need to check xlevel2
> >   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): Set all feature words at end of
> >     function
> >   target-i386: kvm_cpu_fill_host(): Fill feature words in a loop
> >   target-i386: kvm_check_features_against_host(): Kill feature word
> >     array
> > 
> >  target-i386/cpu.c | 89 +++++++++++++------------------------------------------
> >  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)
> > 
> > -- 
> > 1.8.4.2
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Eduardo

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host()

[Andreas Färber]

Am 20.01.2014 21:39, schrieb Michael S. Tsirkin:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 04:36:56PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:41:07PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>>> Resend of series submitted on 24 November 2013, that didn't get any reply. Only
>>> change is a trivial conflict on patch 7/7.
>>
>> Question: which tree is the most appropriate to get this in? qom-cpu?
>> kvm?
> 
> Either kvm or my pc tree.
> Seems unrelated to qom.

Seems unrelated to PC. ;) I've been maintaining target-i386/cpu.c as
part of my QOM CPU tree according to MAINTAINERS.
I don't mind whether this goes through Paolo's or my tree, but for me to
take KVM related changes, I expect review from the KVM side.

> Paolo - want to review and take this?

Regards,
Andreas

>>>  target-i386/cpu.c | 89 +++++++++++++------------------------------------------
>>>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)

-- 
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg

Re: [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host()

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 10:07:47PM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 20.01.2014 21:39, schrieb Michael S. Tsirkin:
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 04:36:56PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:41:07PM -0200, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> >>> Resend of series submitted on 24 November 2013, that didn't get any reply. Only
> >>> change is a trivial conflict on patch 7/7.
> >>
> >> Question: which tree is the most appropriate to get this in? qom-cpu?
> >> kvm?
> > 
> > Either kvm or my pc tree.
> > Seems unrelated to qom.
> 
> Seems unrelated to PC. ;) I've been maintaining target-i386/cpu.c as
> part of my QOM CPU tree according to MAINTAINERS.

Ah, right. Cool, the less work for me the better.

> I don't mind whether this goes through Paolo's or my tree, but for me to
> take KVM related changes, I expect review from the KVM side.
> 
> > Paolo - want to review and take this?
> 
> Regards,
> Andreas
> 
> >>>  target-i386/cpu.c | 89 +++++++++++++------------------------------------------
> >>>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
> GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host()

[Paolo Bonzini]

Il 20/01/2014 21:39, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
>>> > > Resend of series submitted on 24 November 2013, that didn't get any reply. Only
>>> > > change is a trivial conflict on patch 7/7.
>> > 
>> > Question: which tree is the most appropriate to get this in? qom-cpu?
>> > kvm?
> Either kvm or my pc tree.
> Seems unrelated to qom.
> Paolo - want to review and take this?
> 

Yup, will include in the next uq/master pull request.

Paolo

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host()

[Andreas Färber]

Am 21.01.2014 11:03, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> Il 20/01/2014 21:39, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
>>>>>> Resend of series submitted on 24 November 2013, that didn't get any reply. Only
>>>>>> change is a trivial conflict on patch 7/7.
>>>>
>>>> Question: which tree is the most appropriate to get this in? qom-cpu?
>>>> kvm?
>> Either kvm or my pc tree.
>> Seems unrelated to qom.
>> Paolo - want to review and take this?
>>
> 
> Yup, will include in the next uq/master pull request.

Thanks!

Andreas

-- 
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg