From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58252) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dzinO-0005kg-5f for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:29:03 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dzinJ-0001F1-8h for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:29:02 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:43172) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dzinJ-0001Ec-0C for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:28:57 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 09:28:51 -0300 From: Eduardo Habkost Message-ID: <20171004122851.GJ4760@localhost.localdomain> References: <2a93b997d0acd369f35d68981a23ba491443daf6.1507059418.git.alistair.francis@xilinx.com> <20171003203654.GD4760@localhost.localdomain> <20171004131232.32f5caae@nial.brq.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171004131232.32f5caae@nial.brq.redhat.com> 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: Igor Mammedov Cc: Alistair Francis , Marcel Apfelbaum , Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 01:12:32PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 14:41:17 -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. > if cpu isn't user settable, one could just outright die if cpu_type > is not NULL and say that user's CLI is wrong. > (i.e. don't give users illusion that they allowed to use '-cpu') Isn't it exactly what this patch does, by setting: mc->default_cpu_type = ARM_CPU_TYPE_NAME("cortex-a53"); mc->valid_cpu_types = xlnx_zynqmp_valid_cpus; ? Except that "-cpu cortex-a53" won't die, which is a good thing. -- Eduardo