From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46678) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dzaQu-0002tA-8H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Oct 2017 23:33:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dzaQr-0006v3-4e for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Oct 2017 23:33:16 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52266) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dzaQq-0006up-Uc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Oct 2017 23:33:13 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 00:33:07 -0300 From: Eduardo Habkost Message-ID: <20171004033307.GG4760@localhost.localdomain> References: <2a93b997d0acd369f35d68981a23ba491443daf6.1507059418.git.alistair.francis@xilinx.com> <20171003203654.GD4760@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 3/5] xlnx-zcu102: Specify the valid CPUs List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alistair Francis Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" , Marcel Apfelbaum , Igor Mammedov , Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 02:41:17PM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote: > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 01:05:13PM -0700, Alistair Francis wrote: > >> List all possible valid CPU options. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis > >> --- > >> > >> hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c | 10 ++++++++++ > >> hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c | 16 +++++++++------- > >> include/hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.h | 1 + > >> 3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c b/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c > >> index 519a16ed98..039649e522 100644 > >> --- a/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c > >> +++ b/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c > >> @@ -98,6 +98,8 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_init(XlnxZCU102 *s, MachineState *machine) > >> object_property_add_child(OBJECT(machine), "soc", OBJECT(&s->soc), > >> &error_abort); > >> > >> + object_property_set_str(OBJECT(&s->soc), machine->cpu_type, "cpu-type", > >> + &error_fatal); > > > > Do you have plans to support other CPU types to xlnx_zynqmp in > > the future? If not, I wouldn't bother adding the cpu-type > > property and the extra boilerplate code if it's always going to > > be set to cortex-a53. > > No, it'll always be A53. > > I did think of that, but I also wanted to use the new option! I also > think there is an advantage in sanely handling users '-cpu' option, > before now we just ignored it, so I think it still does give a > benefit. That'll be especially important on the Xilinx tree (sometimes > people use our machines with a different CPU to 'benchmark' or test > other CPUs with our CoSimulation setup). So I think it does make sense > to keep in. I see. Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost -- Eduardo