On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:34:57AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:11:08AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > On 04/19/18 11:12, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:39:32AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > >> On 04/19/18 09:56, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > >>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 09:48:36AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > > >>>> Laszlo Ersek <lersek@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > >>>> > > >>>>> On 04/18/18 10:47, Markus Armbruster wrote: > > >>>>>> Laszlo Ersek <lersek@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > >>>> Replacing CpuInfoArch by such an enum will change the discriminator > > >>>> value from "other" to the real architecture, with the obvious > > >>>> compatibility concerns. But we've accepted similar changes twice > > >>>> already: commit 9d0306dfdfb and commit 25fa194b7b1, both v2.12.0-rc0. > > >>>> > > >>>> "other" was a bad idea. Hindsight 20/20. > > >>>> > > >>>> Getting rid of it in one go rather than piecemeal seems like the least > > >>>> bad way out. Too late for 2.12, though. Eric, what do you think? > > >>> > > >>> Given the context in which this "other" value is used, I think it is > > >>> reasonable to kill it and put a full arch list in there. > > >>> > > >>> No app is likely to be accessing the struct under "other" because it > > >>> is just an empty placeholder. > > >> > > >> Commit 9d0306dfdfb added "s390" and "CpuInfoS390", which I guess had the > > >> potential to confuse QMP clients that didn't expect "s390", but > > >> otherwise it didn't mess with preexistent enum values / structures. > > > > > > NB, qemu-system-s390x would previously have returned "other" in > > > this field, and now it returns "s390". So while it didn't > > > remove "other" from the list of things that could potentially > > > exist, it did change what the s390x binary will actually report. > > > > > >> The same applies to commit 25fa194b7b1, just with "riscv" / > > >> "CpuInfoRISCV" substituted. > > >> > > >> Removing "other" might confuse QMP clients that expect it, except > > >> (according to Daniel) no such client exists, probably. > > > > > > When I say removing "other", I imply that we add an explicit arch > > > for all those which we currently are missing. IOW, all qemu-system-XXX > > > binaries which currently report "other" would change to report their > > > respective "XXX" values. > > > > > > So in this way, it is exactly the same as what we did when we > > > introduced "s390" as an option. > > > > > > The only difference is that once we have every binary reporting the > > > correct arch, we can now also remove "other" from the schema itself > > > as it will then be unused. > > > > Can we please translate this into more actionable items for me, because > > I'm getting confused :) > > > > First, if I add "i386" and "x86_64" to the enum list, we'll have all > > three of "i386", "x86_64" and "x86". Is that useful? How will that work? > > Hmm, yes, on closer look this is a big mess as it is. We've been using > generic terms for covering multiple architectures :-( 'x86' for both > i386 and x86_64, 'sparc' for sparc and sparc64, etc. If we try to fix > that we'll be entering a world of backcompat hurt :-( > > Since your schema is likely to end up just being a file in docs/specs, > rather than directly part of our existnig qapi schema, I suggest we just > ignore whats there. Just define an arch enum in your spec which is right, > and let someone else worry about fixing the mess Trouble is, for these "biarch" cases, I'm not sure it's always clear what the right value for a firmware is. While whether a userspace binary is i386 or x86_64 is clear and well-defined, a firmware could well be responsible for switching the CPU from its reset mode into the more modern 64-bit mode, and would therefore have at least some code in both archs. > > Second, assuming I add constants for the ~10 (?) softmmu arches, can I > > still use @CpuInfoOther as the type for the corresponding new members in > > @CpuInfo? What C code changes will be necessary? > > Yes, we could still use the CpuInfoOther struct, since struct names are > invisible to consumers, but as above, lets ignore the mess > > Regards, > Daniel -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
