From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF8C4C433DF for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 01:42:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B045206D4 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 01:42:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7B045206D4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:50470 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jbaDg-0007Pw-Om for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 20 May 2020 21:42:00 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43242) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jbaCq-0006zU-68 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2020 21:41:08 -0400 Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:19324) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jbaCm-0002mk-2t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2020 21:41:07 -0400 IronPort-SDR: qfnxOiWMQSVYOSTS34HOVrSzzumm1ik36rgYL+EB6uaOiudrjlmOrk30C5AzlCnL+cYCljNdEY 7ZmV7dHbYhlQ== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 May 2020 18:40:57 -0700 IronPort-SDR: SZaIfhaVw5No94L0mQ147aZz0kdN72VpdSLi8L3BM6K99i9kp9rXDOtwHmeHAiK/6htdvnbHvW 5fQeuNwniPnA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,416,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="308893282" Received: from sqa-gate.sh.intel.com (HELO robert-ivt.tsp.org) ([10.239.48.212]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 May 2020 18:40:55 -0700 Message-ID: <40954b28075efac72948a9fd43b59ff4e2e9f42a.camel@linux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] target/i386: remove Icelake-Client CPU model From: Robert Hoo To: "Daniel P." =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Berrang=E9?= , Chenyi Qiang Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 09:40:55 +0800 In-Reply-To: <20200520091734.GD2194189@redhat.com> References: <20200520021007.30649-1-chenyi.qiang@intel.com> <20200520021007.30649-6-chenyi.qiang@intel.com> <20200520091734.GD2194189@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-5.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: none client-ip=192.55.52.43; envelope-from=robert.hu@linux.intel.com; helo=mga05.intel.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/20 21:40:57 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = FreeBSD 9.x or newer [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -41 X-Spam_score: -4.2 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paolo Bonzini , Xiaoyao Li , Eduardo Habkost , Richard Henderson Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Wed, 2020-05-20 at 10:17 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 10:10:07AM +0800, Chenyi Qiang wrote: > > There are no Icelake Desktop products in the market. Remove the > > Icelake-Client CPU model. > > QEMU has been shipping this CPU model for 2 years now. Regardless > of what CPUs Intel are selling, it is possible for users to be > running VMs with Icelake-Client CPU if their host satisfies the > listed features. So I don't think it is valid to remove this. > This 'Icelake-Client' actually doesn't exist. How do we define its feature list? and who will be using it? If any special feature tailor requirement, it can be simply achieved by '-cpu Icelake,+/-' features, this is the correct way. I think we should remove it. When we realize something's not correct, we should fix it ASAP. Leaving it there will only cause more serious issue in the future. > Regards, > Daniel