From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NXh8Z-0004zn-Iu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:26:47 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NXh8V-0004yC-Ej for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:26:47 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33695 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NXh8V-0004y3-Bs for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:26:43 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46138) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NXh8U-0003wV-Vp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:26:43 -0500 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:26:35 +0000 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add definitions for current cpu models.. Message-ID: <20100120202634.GA20754@redhat.com> References: <4B549016.6090501@redhat.com> <4B560A88.9@codemonkey.ws> <20100119200349.GG3204@sequoia.sous-sol.org> <4B563144.9030803@codemonkey.ws> <4B576311.3030906@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B576311.3030906@redhat.com> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: john cooper Cc: Chris Wright , "Przywara, Andre" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, KVM list On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 03:09:53PM -0500, john cooper wrote: > 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 . To be honest all possible naming schemes for '-cpu ' are just as unfriendly as each other. The only user friendly option is '-cpu host'. IMHO, we should just pick a concise naming scheme & document it. Given they are all equally unfriendly, the one that has consistency with vmware naming seems like a mild winner. Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|