From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NY1xe-00070R-Ak for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:40:54 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NY1xZ-0006xe-Fj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:40:54 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34651 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NY1xZ-0006xR-3h for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:40:49 -0500 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:19884) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NY1xY-0005HX-OK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:40:48 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NY1xX-00085W-Vx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:40:48 -0500 Message-ID: <4B589EA5.2020501@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:36:21 -0500 From: john cooper MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add definitions for current cpu models.. References: <4B549016.6090501@redhat.com> <4B560A88.9@codemonkey.ws> <20100119221124.GA11920@shareable.org> <4B5762EF.5020106@redhat.com> <20100121181300.GC28467@shareable.org> In-Reply-To: <20100121181300.GC28467@shareable.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jamie Lokier Cc: john.cooper@redhat.com, "Przywara, Andre" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, KVM list Jamie Lokier wrote: > I think we can all agree that there is no point looking for a familiar > -cpu naming scheme because there aren't any familiar and meaningful names > these days. Even if we dismiss the Intel coined names as internal code names, there is still VMW's use of them in this space which we can either align with or attempt to displace. All considered I don't see any motivation nor gain in doing the latter. Anyway it doesn't appear likely we're going to resolve this to our collective satisfaction with a hard-wired naming scheme. > It would be nice if qemu could tell the user which of the built-in > -cpu choices is the most featureful subset of their own host. With > -cpu host implemented, finding that is probably quite easy. This should be doable although it may not be as simple as traversing a hierarchy of features and picking one with the most host flags present. In any case this should be fairly detachable from settling the immediate issue. -john -- john.cooper@redhat.com