On 30.10.2016 12:11, David Gibson wrote: > spapr_h_cas_compose_response() includes a cpu_update parameter which > controls whether it includes updated information on the CPUs in the device > tree fragment returned from the ibm,client-architecture-support (CAS) call. > > Providing the updated information is essential when CAS has negotiated > compatibility options which require different cpu information to be > presented to the guest. However, it should be safe to provide in other > cases (it will just override the existing data in the device tree with > identical data). This simplifies the code by removing the parameter and > always providing the cpu update information.
But updating the CPU device tree again and again will also increase the QEMU start-up time... Considering that guest start up time is sometimes also an issue, do you think that this code simplification really worth the effort here? Thomas
