Re: [PATCH v2 11/12] hw/arm/raspi: Deprecate old raspiX machine names

["Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@linaro.org>]

On 4/2/25 12:13, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 at 09:57, Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 10:51:04AM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>> On 4/2/25 10:22, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 at 00:23, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> All previous raspi machines can be created using the
>>>>> generic machine. Deprecate the old names to maintain
>>>>> a single one. Update the tests.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/docs/about/deprecated.rst b/docs/about/deprecated.rst
>>>>> index 4a3c302962a..c9a11a52f78 100644
>>>>> --- a/docs/about/deprecated.rst
>>>>> +++ b/docs/about/deprecated.rst
>>>>> @@ -257,6 +257,19 @@ Big-Endian variants of MicroBlaze ``petalogix-ml605`` and ``xlnx-zynqmp-pmu`` ma
>>>>>    Both ``petalogix-ml605`` and ``xlnx-zynqmp-pmu`` were added for little endian
>>>>>    CPUs. Big endian support is not tested.
>>>>>
>>>>> +ARM ``raspi0``, ``raspi1ap``, ``raspi2b``, ``raspi3ap``, ``raspi3b`` and ``raspi4b`` machines (since 10.0)
>>>>> +''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
>>>>> +
>>>>> +The Raspberry Pi machines have been unified under the generic ``raspi`` machine,
>>>>> +which takes the model as argument.
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    - `raspi0`` is now an alias for ``raspi,model=Zero``
>>>>> +    - `raspi1ap`` is now an alias for ``raspi,model=1A+``
>>>>> +    - `raspi2b`` is now an alias for ``raspi,model=2B``
>>>>> +    - `raspi3ap`` is now an alias for ``raspi,model=3A+``
>>>>> +    - `raspi3b`` is now an alias for ``raspi,model=3B``
>>>>> +    - `raspi4b`` is now an alias for ``raspi,model=4B``
>>>>
>>>> This is not how we typically handle "we have a bunch
>>>> of different devboards in one family". What's wrong with the
>>>> existing set of machine names?
>>>
>>> Zoltan and you don't want to add more machine names, then you
>>> don't want a generic machine. This is very confusing.
>>
>> IMHO we can have distinct machines for each model, but
>> *NOT* have further machines for each RAM size within a
>> model.
> 
> Yes, this was what I was intending to suggest. Apologies
> if I was confusing with what I said the previous time round.

OK, let's see if we understand each other correctly as developer,
before explaining to users, taking the 4B model as example.

The 4B come in 4 physical variants, depending on the amount of
DRAM: 1G, 2G, 4G and 8G.

We can not allocate 2G on 32-bit hosts, so to have a reproducible
guest behavior on 32/64-bit hosts, it makes sense to takes the
model with 1G of DRAM as default for the 'raspi4b' machine.

If an user specify -m 2G ... 8G, we can adapt the 'board_rev'
register to expose the corresponding amount of ram. Now, how /
where to tell the users 1/ the default is 1G, and 2/ they can use
2/4/8G?