From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7572BC02185 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 11:02:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tYk6V-0007IP-24; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 06:01:31 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tYk6N-0007I2-UN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 06:01:25 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tYk6L-0000mm-Uv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 06:01:23 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1737111680; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=4opUbAhPeDpMc4HGkna32ivLpdJsbrXGWy+UyBGTIUQ=; b=G4RlqmodaXMQJzvM8eGgtmfwFRjiKDjmFL1z8900zSUU4wwcgjKHauJLVZ03jSPmCXIUU+ FWpMYpMkl0L9tnlWFDHhg0VqhZBW8Qsg01HfcroOrjcvp9QuBRPey6cRSP9K6yc+2sIiTB DZGHorEuasXEkSMCL4yS5+iwd54EcI4= Received: from mx-prod-mc-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-383-X2IQ4hXwPWm2PNw1h8L9cQ-1; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 06:01:13 -0500 X-MC-Unique: X2IQ4hXwPWm2PNw1h8L9cQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: X2IQ4hXwPWm2PNw1h8L9cQ Received: from mx-prod-int-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.40]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B49E1955D80; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 11:01:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.42.28.60]) by mx-prod-int-04.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 841A019560BF; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 11:01:05 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 11:01:02 +0000 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Thomas Huth Cc: Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Peter Maydell , Igor Mammedov , Andrew Jones , Shannon Zhao , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Ani Sinha , qemu-arm@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH-for-10.1 v2 00/13] hw/arm: Remove virt-2.6 up to virt-2.12 machines Message-ID: References: <20250116145944.38028-1-philmd@linaro.org> <823a0892-e9d9-4d26-b862-83ffd60c2ad1@linaro.org> <70342038-6bd6-4c80-b46f-69a3c58fb5b5@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <70342038-6bd6-4c80-b46f-69a3c58fb5b5@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.13 (2024-03-09) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.40 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -21 X-Spam_score: -2.2 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.093, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 09:29:40AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 17/01/2025 09.09, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 07:47:15AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > On 16/01/2025 22.13, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > > > > > On 16/1/25 15:59, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > > > > > The versioned 'virt' machines up to 2.12 been marked as deprecated > > > > > two releases ago, and are older than 6 years, so according to our > > > > > support policy we can remove them. Remove associated dead code. > > > > > > > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (13): > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove deprecated virt-2.6 machine > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove VirtMachineClass::no_pmu field > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove VirtMachineClass::disallow_affinity_adjustment > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove deprecated virt-2.7 machine > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove VirtMachineClass::no_its field > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove deprecated virt-2.8 machine > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove VirtMachineClass::claim_edge_triggered_timers > > > > >      field > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove deprecated virt-2.9 machine > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove deprecated virt-2.10 machine > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove deprecated virt-2.11 machine > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove VirtMachineClass::smbios_old_sys_ver field > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove deprecated virt-2.12 machine > > > > >    hw/arm/virt: Remove VirtMachineClass::no_highmem_ecam field > > > > > > > > Please ignore this (reviewed) series for now. I'll rebase it and > > > > repost after the 10.0 release. > > > > > > Why? IMHO it should be ok to include them now already. While Daniel's macro > > > only starts the automatic disablement for 10.1, it should be ok to remove > > > them now already according to our normal deprecation policy: The machines > > > have been marked as deprecated in the 9.1 release already (via commit > > > https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/commit/ce80c4fa6ff ), and thus they > > > have been deprecated since two releases already. So it should be fine to > > > remove them now, shouldn't it? > > > > No, because as of 9.1.0 we documented that machine types are under the > > new policy, and these were only deprecated in 9.1.0, hence the new policy > > applies to them. > > Hm, I guess we could argue now about the wording (I don't see a spot in > ce80c4fa6ff that says that this only happens starting with 10.1), but in the > long run, it doesn't really matter much whether we remove these machines > with 10.0 already or just with 10.1, so let's go with 10.1 instead. That's the wrong commit - I documented the delayed impl of deletion in a separate commit, so that we could just revert that part on its own in 10.1 dev: commit c9fd2d9a48ee3c195cf83cc611b87b09f02f0013 Author: Daniel P. Berrangé Date: Thu Jun 20 17:57:37 2024 +0100 include/hw: temporarily disable deletion of versioned machine types The new deprecation and deletion policy for versioned machine types is being introduced in QEMU 9.1.0. Under the new policy a number of old machine types (any prior to 2.12) would be liable for immediate deletion which would be a violation of our historical deprecation and removal policy Thus automatic deletions (by skipping QOM registration) are temporarily gated on existance of the env variable "QEMU_DELETE_MACHINES" / QEMU version number >= 10.1.0. This allows opt-in testing of the automatic deletion logic, while activating it fully in QEMU >= 10.1.0. This whole commit should be reverted in the 10.1.0 dev cycle or shortly thereafter. Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth Message-ID: <20240620165742.1711389-10-berrange@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé If a machine type was deprected *before* the 9.1 release cycle, I think it is fair game to delete it under the historical deprecation rules. If a machine type was deprecated in 9.1, or later cycles, I think that deletion is gated until 10.1.0 under the policy applied by that commit above. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|