From: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Cc: Pu Wen <puwen@hygon.cn>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, rth@twiddle.net,
mst@redhat.com, marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] i386: Add new Hygon 'Dhyana' CPU model
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:16:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190416081605.GB31311@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190415203917.GA32317@habkost.net>
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 05:39:17PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 10:54:40AM +0800, Pu Wen wrote:
> > Add a new base CPU model called 'Dhyana' to model processors from Hygon
> > Dhyana(family 18h), which derived from AMD EPYC(family 17h).
> >
> > The following features bits have been removed compare to AMD EPYC:
> > aes, pclmulqdq, sha_ni
> >
> > The Hygon Dhyana support to KVM in Linux is already accepted upstream[1].
> > So add Hygon Dhyana support to Qemu is necessary to create Hygon's own
> > CPU model.
> >
> > Reference:
> > [1] https://git.kernel.org/tip/fec98069fb72fb656304a3e52265e0c2fc9adf87
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pu Wen <puwen@hygon.cn>
>
> Thanks for the patch.
>
> I'm wondering if we should let the CPU model be used only on
> Hygon hosts, to avoid confusion.
Why should we artificially restrict it ? All the other CPUs are able to
be used on any host that is able to support the feature list required by
the CPU model. If some other host has sufficient features to run Dhyana
the CPU model we shouldn't block it.
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 :|
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Cc: mst@redhat.com, Pu Wen <puwen@hygon.cn>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, rth@twiddle.net
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] i386: Add new Hygon 'Dhyana' CPU model
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 09:16:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190416081605.GB31311@redhat.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20190416081605.42NdrMh3TyW61sKcTuiC98CmxHrVlmzcL2PMez8XEQw@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190415203917.GA32317@habkost.net>
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 05:39:17PM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 10:54:40AM +0800, Pu Wen wrote:
> > Add a new base CPU model called 'Dhyana' to model processors from Hygon
> > Dhyana(family 18h), which derived from AMD EPYC(family 17h).
> >
> > The following features bits have been removed compare to AMD EPYC:
> > aes, pclmulqdq, sha_ni
> >
> > The Hygon Dhyana support to KVM in Linux is already accepted upstream[1].
> > So add Hygon Dhyana support to Qemu is necessary to create Hygon's own
> > CPU model.
> >
> > Reference:
> > [1] https://git.kernel.org/tip/fec98069fb72fb656304a3e52265e0c2fc9adf87
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pu Wen <puwen@hygon.cn>
>
> Thanks for the patch.
>
> I'm wondering if we should let the CPU model be used only on
> Hygon hosts, to avoid confusion.
Why should we artificially restrict it ? All the other CPUs are able to
be used on any host that is able to support the feature list required by
the CPU model. If some other host has sufficient features to run Dhyana
the CPU model we shouldn't block it.
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 :|
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-16 8:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-13 2:54 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] i386: Add new Hygon 'Dhyana' CPU model Pu Wen
2019-04-13 2:54 ` Pu Wen
2019-04-15 9:25 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-04-15 9:25 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-04-16 6:56 ` Pu Wen
2019-04-16 6:56 ` Pu Wen
2019-04-16 8:18 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-04-16 8:18 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-04-16 9:04 ` Pu Wen
2019-04-16 9:04 ` Pu Wen
2019-04-15 20:39 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-15 20:39 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-16 7:09 ` Pu Wen
2019-04-16 7:09 ` Pu Wen
2019-04-16 8:16 ` Daniel P. Berrangé [this message]
2019-04-16 8:16 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-04-16 14:23 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-16 14:23 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-16 14:27 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-04-16 14:27 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-04-16 14:58 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-16 14:58 ` Eduardo Habkost
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190416081605.GB31311@redhat.com \
--to=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=marcel.apfelbaum@gmail.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=puwen@hygon.cn \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.