Am 13.11.2012 13:29, schrieb Eduardo Habkost: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 01:58:38PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote: >> >> Please send in any agenda topics you are interested in. > > - Clarify 1.3 plans for CPU: >From my submaintainer POV: > DeviceState CPU, I was specifically tasked with the qdev split by Anthony, so unless major obstacles arise I will send a PULL until Thursday. What I am still unsure about is whether it makes sense to actually apply the final CPU-as-device change for v1.3 since that exposes the device name(s) as public "ABI", cf. below. A safety option would be no_user = 1 to avoid users messing with untested use cases at this time. > x86 CPU classes, If I get through review quickly enough and RFC seems sane and I get a PATCH, I might include it in the pull. To me, classes are prerequisites to exposing CPU-as-a-device because otherwise the user specifies the base class that we want to make abstract (which will then break backwards compatibility) and has no API to set it to something useful. Once applied, we would still have half a month for testing. > x86 CPU properties Won't make v1.3 due to timing constraints. There are also still unresolved review comments related to property naming IIRC. > (we still want to get any of this included, or all will have to wait for 1.4?) Regards, Andreas -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg -- 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
