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 39556C5AE59 for ; Wed, 28 May 2025 05:03:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uK8wN-0003QS-76; Wed, 28 May 2025 01:02:59 -0400 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 1uK8wG-0003Ll-V6; Wed, 28 May 2025 01:02:54 -0400 Received: from mgamail.intel.com ([198.175.65.11]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uK8wA-00012s-PI; Wed, 28 May 2025 01:02:52 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1748408567; x=1779944567; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=YTrDOo3og3ow/vshYxgybPn/VW37aD897O1rYMU/oj0=; b=OYSW/K6NfCX+YO2k9LnU8q2KVMi8whFB98r9cJcxo3lRefzX1YsmWKwH +Yhc0D4HaL1XW8zc9KC9DdaLX/qbqyDa+P5i66D6ADNZEwRUjlLGGeQ9D fJdqDGCBaVMdlejgbvT6DIdUgR1sIk/TeBcfujZ6spDm1vfhH9P3eXYfN 8QOUAaWXwaEeUUKVh3y1nSpRrN6f12My95bNly8yMGhpN20tRQ7SUMBcd 4WWV6sOgSugTFjbAQfb+eYn4jmAMG48VevEYXKteBFmZbgq9CJrG0+qWF vp0rSbn4JMQNT/k8jy3w4V4dXX+hFpiTQDCsnJHBUFKVOgrbSQWnjNu8W g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 20k601caSyGts1qyCz3ACQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: BpuncPBQTdWCYEfpTADhJg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11446"; a="60674123" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,320,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="60674123" Received: from fmviesa004.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.144]) by orvoesa103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 May 2025 22:02:44 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: pFvX0X3+S2SNesHxbWOiUA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: lJhui115QOu0cl0wqSkrng== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,320,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="148252801" Received: from liuzhao-optiplex-7080.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.239.160.39]) by fmviesa004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 May 2025 22:02:39 -0700 Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 13:23:49 +0800 From: Zhao Liu To: Xiaoyao Li Cc: Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Yanan Wang , Kevin Wolf , Richard Henderson , Marcel Apfelbaum , qemu-block@nongnu.org, Fabiano Rosas , Fam Zheng , Jason Wang , Laurent Vivier , Paolo Bonzini , Dmitry Fleytman , Eduardo Habkost , Hanna Reitz , John Snow , Gerd Hoffmann , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Daniel =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=2E_Berrang=E9?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/19] target/i386/cpu: Remove X86CPU::check_cpuid field Message-ID: References: <20250512083948.39294-1-philmd@linaro.org> <20250512083948.39294-5-philmd@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=198.175.65.11; envelope-from=zhao1.liu@intel.com; helo=mgamail.intel.com X-Spam_score_int: -72 X-Spam_score: -7.3 X-Spam_bar: ------- X-Spam_report: (-7.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-2.907, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 10:09:56AM +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 10:09:56 +0800 > From: Xiaoyao Li > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/19] target/i386/cpu: Remove X86CPU::check_cpuid > field > > On 5/12/2025 4:39 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daud¨¦ wrote: > > The X86CPU::check_cpuid boolean was only set in the > > pc_compat_2_4[] array, via the 'check=off' property. > > We removed all machines using that array, lets remove > > that CPU property and simplify x86_cpu_realizefn(). > > No. > > We cannot do this. Because it changes the behavior of QEMU. > > 'check_cpuid' is true by default while 'enforce_cpuid' is false. So that > QEMU emits warnings in x86_cpu_filter_features() by default when user > requests unsupported CPU features. If remove "check" property and the > internal 'check_cpuid', QEMU will not do it unless user sets enforce_cpuid > explicitly. One option would be to have x86_cpu_filter_features() unconditionally turn on verbose and print warnings, but some people might want to turn off these warning prints, I don't know if anyone would, but it would be possible. The other option is still to keep the ˇ°checkˇ± property. IMO, the latter option is the better way to reduce Philippe's burden. Regards, Zhao