From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33179) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YOqtr-0007Zt-Ql for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 11:58:00 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YOqtn-0002yc-TG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 11:57:59 -0500 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:44244 helo=mx2.suse.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YOqtn-0002yV-Me for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 11:57:55 -0500 Message-ID: <54E76790.1030700@suse.de> Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:57:52 +0100 From: Alexander Graf MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1424183053-4310-1-git-send-email-mimu@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1424183053-4310-5-git-send-email-mimu@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <54E73C8F.7000202@suse.de> <20150220160046.4743acc8@bee> <89E3550E-9E2B-4D95-A809-B7C64EBCD7C5@suse.de> <20150220164944.4eb4eeb3@bee> In-Reply-To: <20150220164944.4eb4eeb3@bee> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 04/15] cpu-model/s390: Introduce S390 CPU models List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Michael Mueller Cc: "linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , Gleb Natapov , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Christian Borntraeger , "Jason J. Herne" , Cornelia Huck , Paolo Bonzini , Andreas Faerber , Richard Henderson On 20.02.15 16:49, Michael Mueller wrote: > On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 16:22:20 +0100 > Alexander Graf wrote: > >>>> >>>> Just make this uint64_t fac_list[2]. That way we don't have to track any >>>> messy allocations. >>> >>> It will be something like "uint64_t fac_list[S390_CPU_FAC_LIST_SIZE_UINT64]" and in total 2KB >>> not just 16 bytes but I will change it. >> >> Why? Do we actually need that many? This is a qemu internal struct. > > How do you know that 2 is a good size? Because all CPUs we have in our list only expose 128 bits? > I want to have this independent from a future machine of the z/Arch. The kernel stores the full > facility set, KVM does and there is no good reason for QEMU not to do. If other accelerators > decide to just implement 64 or 128 bits of facilities that's ok... So you want to support CPUs that are not part of the list? Alex