RE: RFC: top level compatibles for virtual platforms

[Yoder Stuart-B08248 <B08248@freescale.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: glikely@secretlab.ca [mailto:glikely@secretlab.ca] On Behalf Of Gra=
nt Likely
> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2011 9:42 PM
> To: Tabi Timur-B04825
> Cc: Yoder Stuart-B08248; Grant Likely; Benjamin Herrenschmidt; Gala Kumar=
-B11780; Wood Scott-
> B07421; Alexander Graf; linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
> Subject: Re: RFC: top level compatibles for virtual platforms
>=20
> On Friday, July 8, 2011, Tabi Timur-B04825 <B04825@freescale.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Yoder Stuart-B08248
> > <B08248@freescale.com> wrote:
> >
> >> =A0 "MPC85xxDS" - for a virtual machine for the e500v2 type platforms
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 and would support 85xx targets, plus P=
2020, P1022,etc
> >>
> >> =A0 "corenet-32-ds" - for a virtual machine similar to the 32-bit P408=
0
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 platforms
> >>
> >> =A0 "corenet-64-ds" - for a virtual machine based on a 64-bit corenet
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 platform
> >
> > I think we should drop the "DS" because that's a name applied to
> > certain Freescale reference boards.
> >
> > Is being a CoreNet board really something meaningful with respect to
> > KVM? =A0I don't see the connection.
> >
> > Also, if these are KVM creations, shouldn't there be a "kvm" in the
> > compatible string somewhere?
>=20
> I would say so. That would accurately describe the execution environment.

As I mentioned to Timur, there is nothing KVM specific about
the execution environment.   The /hypervisor node (as per=20
ePAPR 1.1) describes hypervisor specific info.

Stuart