From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IEoeO-0007sv-CJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:56:16 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IEoeM-0007rx-DI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:56:15 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IEoeM-0007rk-6i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:56:14 -0400 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.184]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IEoeL-0005J7-5t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:56:13 -0400 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 30so87190nfu for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:56:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 18:55:58 +0300 From: Paul Sokolovsky Message-ID: <582026785.20070728185558@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] QEmu as a Device Software Optimization tool In-Reply-To: References: <828800.95578.qm@web54107.mail.re2.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paul Borman Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Hello Paul, Friday, July 27, 2007, 12:25:13 PM, you wrote: > The embedded space contains a vast number of boards, often only > different by what devices are use, where they are located, etc. > Building a new version of qemu for each board would be burdensome. > The hope would be that we could build a generic qemu (for an > architecture family), say, ppc_generic, which then read an external > file (which, in our case, will be generated from board description) > and configure itself according to that. Further, by allowing devices > to be loaded vi dlopen(), devices can be added after qemu has been > built. This would also allow the developer to specify the exact > location of the device, rather than having a list of IRQ's and base > ports, etc. > For the embedded world, yes, "outsiders" are certainly going to want > to define new platforms and more than likely, provide their own > custom devices. They key is they do not need to muck with the real > internals of qemu, just the part that picks the bits and pieces to use. Funnily, this is the same argumentation as I used more than half-year ago when there was last big discussion on the need of flexible and generalized config file: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2006-10/msg00249.html Then, it received rather cool response, I actually don't remember any single vote for flexible/structural config and plugins. Well, I always thought that just a small time will be required for more wider audience to chime in and come back to this idea ;-). > Oh, and if I am an outsider, then absolutely the answer is yes!, I > already have had the need :-) > -Paul [] -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com