On 05.08.2013, at 22:59, Andreas Färber wrote: > Commit 03a15a5436ed7723f406f15cc3798aa9991e75b5 claimed to add a POWER7+ > model but instead added a "POWER7P" model, with an unhelpful "POWER7P" > description on top. Fix this to "POWER7+" as we already have "POWER3+", > "POWER4+" and "POWER5+" and there being no reason to deviate with the > user-visible command line -cpu POWER7P from the marketing name POWER7+. > > Further, don't needlessly deviate from the scheme of naming PVR constant, > QOM type and device description after the exact revision that is in fact > encoded in the PVR used. > That way, we can change the user-friendly alias -cpu POWER7+ to point to a > different revision if we so desire, while not polluting the type namespace. > > This naming scheme is sensible and completely orthogonal to how PVRs may > or may not get matched to CPU types. > > Cc: Alexey Kardashevskiy <a...@ozlabs.ru> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de>
Thanks, applied to ppc-next and added a CC to qemu-stable so it gets into 1.6.1. Alex
