* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host() [not found] <1390236074-21533-1-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com> @ 2014-01-20 18:36 ` Eduardo Habkost 2014-01-20 20:39 ` Michael S. Tsirkin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Eduardo Habkost @ 2014-01-20 18:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: qemu-devel Cc: Igor Mammedov, Andreas Färber, Michael S. Tsirkin, Paolo Bonzini, kvm 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host() 2014-01-20 18:36 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host() Eduardo Habkost @ 2014-01-20 20:39 ` Michael S. Tsirkin 2014-01-20 21:07 ` Andreas Färber 2014-01-21 10:03 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Michael S. Tsirkin @ 2014-01-20 20:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eduardo Habkost Cc: qemu-devel, Igor Mammedov, Andreas Färber, Paolo Bonzini, kvm 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host() 2014-01-20 20:39 ` Michael S. Tsirkin @ 2014-01-20 21:07 ` Andreas Färber 2014-01-20 22:51 ` Michael S. Tsirkin 2014-01-21 10:03 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Andreas Färber @ 2014-01-20 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael S. Tsirkin, Eduardo Habkost Cc: qemu-devel, Igor Mammedov, Paolo Bonzini, kvm 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host() 2014-01-20 21:07 ` Andreas Färber @ 2014-01-20 22:51 ` Michael S. Tsirkin 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Michael S. Tsirkin @ 2014-01-20 22:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andreas Färber Cc: Igor Mammedov, Paolo Bonzini, Eduardo Habkost, kvm, qemu-devel 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host() 2014-01-20 20:39 ` Michael S. Tsirkin 2014-01-20 21:07 ` Andreas Färber @ 2014-01-21 10:03 ` Paolo Bonzini 2014-01-21 10:20 ` Andreas Färber 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Paolo Bonzini @ 2014-01-21 10:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael S. Tsirkin Cc: Eduardo Habkost, qemu-devel, Igor Mammedov, Andreas Färber, kvm 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host() 2014-01-21 10:03 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini @ 2014-01-21 10:20 ` Andreas Färber 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Andreas Färber @ 2014-01-21 10:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin, Eduardo Habkost, qemu-devel, Igor Mammedov, kvm 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-01-21 10:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1390236074-21533-1-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com>
2014-01-20 18:36 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7 RESEND] target-i386: Simplify kvm_cpu_fill_host() and kvm_check_features_against_host() Eduardo Habkost
2014-01-20 20:39 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-20 21:07 ` Andreas Färber
2014-01-20 22:51 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-01-21 10:03 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2014-01-21 10:20 ` Andreas Färber
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).