On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 09:34:08 +0200 David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 25.07.2018 01:02, Collin Walling wrote: > > Thanks for expanding on what the "max" model name is suppose to be. I wonder if a > > s/"qemu"/"max" in QEMU would suffice (I'm taking a shot in the dark here.) > > Nope, it dynamically has to map to qemu/host depending on the > accelerator. But it also has to be a valid QOM object ("max-s390x-cpu"). > > > > > @Connie, @David, you both are far more knowledgeable in this area than I am. What > > do either of you suggest for moving forward with this? Should we forward this > > discussion on qemu-devel? > > > > I can have a look if nobody else wants to tackle it. I'll gladly merge a patch :) This is probably 3.1 material, so libvirt will need compat handling for it, I guess. -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list