On Mon, Feb 03, 2025 at 02:29:49PM +0000, Alex Bennée wrote: > Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 at 12:57, BALATON Zoltan <balaton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, 1 Feb 2025, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > >> > - Deprecate the 'raspi4b' machine name, renaming it as > >> > 'raspi4b-1g' on 32-bit hosts, 'raspi4b-2g' otherwise. > >> > - Add the 'raspi4b-4g' and 'raspi4b-8g' machines, with > >> > respectively 4GB and 8GB of DRAM. > >> > >> IMHO (meaning you can ignore it, just my opinion) if the only difference > >> is the memory size -machine raspi4b -memory 4g would be better user > >> experience than having a lot of different machines. > > > > Yes, I think I agree. We have a way for users to specify > > how much memory they want, and I think it makes more sense > > to use that than to have lots of different machine types. > > I guess for the Pi we should validate the -memory supplied is on of the > supported grid of devices rather than an arbitrary value? If the user wants to create a rpi4 with 6 GB RAM why should we stop them ? It is their choice if they want to precisely replicate RAM size from a physical model, or use something different when virtualized. 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 :|
