From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53701) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V1K5F-0003jC-S9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:39:47 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V1K5A-0005jr-Hr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:39:41 -0400 Received: from mail-ie0-f178.google.com ([209.85.223.178]:51408) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V1K5A-0005jb-DP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:39:36 -0400 Received: by mail-ie0-f178.google.com with SMTP id u16so16446290iet.9 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 10:39:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Anthony Liguori In-Reply-To: References: <1374483382-12141-1-git-send-email-proljc@gmail.com> <1374483382-12141-5-git-send-email-proljc@gmail.com> <51ED0B7A.2010205@suse.de> <51ED14BD.8050406@suse.de> <51ED26AE.4030201@suse.de> <87li4ywr9s.fsf@codemonkey.ws> Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 12:39:31 -0500 Message-ID: <874nbm7auk.fsf@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 4/4] target-openrisc: Fix cpu_model by name List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Christian Borntraeger , Richard Henderson , Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rber?= , Jia Liu Peter Maydell writes: > On 22 July 2013 16:25, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Andreas F=C3=A4rber writes: >>> Am 22.07.2013 13:34, schrieb Peter Maydell: >>>> Looking at all of the '-cpu help' output, alpha seems to be >>>> the odd one out here: none of the others list valid CPUs >>>> with "-$arch-cpu" suffixes. >>> >>> Right, because all others had implemented -cpu ? before we introduced >>> that naming scheme and I tried to keep output compatibility for them. >>> Focus for alpha was therefore on -cpu foo compatibility only. >>> >>> Anthony had clearly stated on a KVM call that using full type names for >>> future CPU hot-add was the right thing to do and possibly even composite >>> convenience types like 4core-xeonblabla-x86_64-cpu; how that relates to >>> -cpu and new targets was never clearly defined though. ;) >> >> That's pretty gross, but yes, we should have: >> >> qemu -device Xeon-E5-4610,id=3Dsock0 -device Xeon-E5-4610,id=3Dsock1 >> >> Which effectively does: >> >> qemu -cpu SandyBridge -smp cores=3D6,threads=3D2,sockets=3D2 >> >> By today's standards. > > That doesn't really answer the question of "should the argument > to -cpu be a QOM typename or a human friendly name?" They shouldn't be different things IMHO. > though > (though I note none of your -cpu or -device argument examples > are QOM type names, since they're missing the -$arch-cpu suffix). I'm not sure the rationale of $arch-cpu but I think having a forced suffix is a bad idea. >> I think this applies equally well to other architecture. >> Model hardware more closely. > > For ARM this would mean "don't support -cpu at all, it > is always hardwired by the board model" :-) Is that a bad thing? I really hate the -cpu option. I hope it dies a horrible bitrotten death over time once -device can be used to replace it. Regards, Anthony Liguori > > -- PMM