On 03/03/2025 18.32, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 3/3/25 17:57, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Mon, 3 Mar 2025 at 15:49, Cédric Le Goater <c...@redhat.com> wrote:
Why are we keeping qemu-system-ppc and qemu-system-i386, and arm,
since qemu-system-ppc64 and qemu-system-x86_64 should be able to
run the same machines ?
They're not identical -- for example "-cpu max" on
qemu-system-arm is a 32-bit CPU but on qemu-system-aarch64
it is a 64-bit CPU.
There's definitely a lot of overlap but we can't just drop
the -arm executable until/unless we figure out what to do
about the corner cases where they are different. Plus there's
a lot of users out there with existing command lines and
configs that assume the existence of a qemu-system-arm
executable.
Thomas and myself have been trying to sort that out. Now with the
single-binary effort, it gained new interest. This hasn't be a trivial
task so far, due to as you mentioned the legacy CLI uses and migration.
FWIW, here's my former attempt to see whether we could move into that direction:
https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/20230425133851.489283-1-th...@redhat.com/
In the end, it was too frustrating to struggle with the
backwards-compatibility questions (do we really need to keep
qemu-system-i386 around forever?), so I pretty much gave up on that patch
series.
Thomas
