On 01/02/2012 02:46 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
QOM: If Anthony is available, I'd be interested in hearing an update on
the roadmap. In particular,
* when can we expect to be able to model SoCs rather than CPUs? Will
this affect command line usage - are we going to have '-device
ti-tms570' rather than '-cpu cortex-r4' then, or -cpu overriding the
container's default?
* are the announced remaining 3 series going to touch CPUState? a) Are
CPU features being refactored (standardized) for QOM or should we copy
current x86 code for controlling ARM FPU? b) Any plans for adding
inheritence, e.g., for CPU_COMMON and CPU reset?
Also, Anthony, what are the remaining 3 series exactly? :)
In particular, we should decide as soon as possible about moving
features up from Device to Object or to new intermediate classes (e.g.
IntrospectableObject for properties?), because I would like to start
dogfooding QOM. Right now, we have legacy properties but qdev functions
still poke directly into the structs rather than using them.
* what's the effect on VMState? Will VMState continue to coexist with
QOM, or does QOM replace VMState at some point? Is it worth introducing
new size mechanisms now or should we postpone SD/AHCI migration until
QOM is merged?
I think no. Postponing new device models (virtio-scsi) might make some
sense, but VMState is definitely going to be with us for some time---at
least it's not disappearing soon enough that we should halt any
development in that area.
Paolo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
