From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NXMVh-0003qO-OT
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:25:17 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NXMVc-0003o1-Qv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:25:17 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=32768 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NXMVc-0003nt-J2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:25:12 -0500
Received: from qw-out-1920.google.com ([74.125.92.145]:44987)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1NXMVc-0003gY-8j
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:25:12 -0500
Received: by qw-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 4so41922qwk.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:25:11 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4B563144.9030803@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:25:08 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add definitions for current cpu models..
References: <4B549016.6090501@redhat.com> <4B560A88.9@codemonkey.ws>
	<20100119200349.GG3204@sequoia.sous-sol.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100119200349.GG3204@sequoia.sous-sol.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>
Cc: john cooper <john.cooper@redhat.com>, "Przywara,
	Andre" <Andre.Przywara@amd.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>

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.

There is no mention of "Nehalem" in /proc/cpuinfo.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori
> thanks,
> -chris
>