Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add definitions for current cpu models..

[Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>]

On 01/25/10 23:35, Dor Laor wrote:
> On 01/25/2010 04:21 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Another way to look at this is that implementing a somewhat arbitrary
>> policy within QEMU's .c files is something we should try to avoid.
>> Implementing arbitrary policy in our default config file is a fine thing
>> to do. Default configs are suggested configurations that are modifiable
>> by a user. Something baked into QEMU is something that ought to work for
 >
> If we get the models right, users and mgmt stacks won't need to define
> them. It seems like almost impossible task for us, mgmt stack/users
> won't do a better job, the opposite I guess. The configs are great, I
> have no argument against them, my case is that if we can pin down some
> definitions, its better live in the code, like the above models.
> It might even help to get the same cpus across the various vendors,
> otherwise we might end up with IBM's core2duo, RH's core2duo, Suse's,..

I agree.  When looking at this thread and config file idea it feels a 
bit like "we have a hard time to agree on some sensible default cpu 
types, so lets make this configurable so we don't have to".  Which is a 
bad thing IMHO.

cheers,
   Gerd