On 30 April 2013 15:30, Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote: > My concern is that we already have a QEMUMachineInitArgs.cpu_model > field, and now QEMUMachine.cpu_model and QEMUMachineInitArgs.cpu_model > are redundant. > > To make it worse, both variables can disagree with each other because we > have other code that set QEMUMachineInitArgs.cpu_model outside of > main(): > > hw/arm/realview.c:338: args->cpu_model = "arm926"; > hw/arm/realview.c:346: args->cpu_model = "arm11mpcore"; > hw/arm/realview.c:354: args->cpu_model = "cortex-a8"; > hw/arm/realview.c:362: args->cpu_model = "cortex-a9"; > hw/arm/versatilepb.c:189: args->cpu_model = "arm926"; > > ARM doesn't have CPU hotplug, but this is still a bug waiting to happen.
This ARM code is just borrowing the cpu_model field as a convenient place to stash the default value for the board. There are other ARM boards which do a similar thing but in a purely local variable (eg vexpress)... I think really if you want to know what the current CPU model is you need to fish the relevant QOM qbject out from somewhere at runtime. -- PMM
