On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 03:42:09PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 15.01.2018 14:01, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On 15 January 2018 at 09:30, Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> (off-topic question: Do we still need a separate ppcemb-softmmu nowadays? > >> It seemed to be useful 10 years ago when everybody was doing KVM on > >> embedded PPC, but these days seem to be pretty much over now, so IMHO > >> just using ppc-softmmu for embedded should be enough nowadays? We could > >> save quite some compilation- and "make check"-time if we could finally get > >> rid of ppcemb-softmmu again...) > > > > There are some specific differences guarded by TARGET_PPCEMB, like > > the way it has a different TARGET_PAGE_BITS value, and some code > > in target/ppc/kvm.c related to telling KVM about interrupts. You > > would need to make those all be runtime decisions I assume. > > True ... but while we maybe could turn those into runtime checks, I now > rather think it's maybe better to go the other way round: Maybe we > should not include each and everything into ppc64-softmmu, but put the > embedded stuff only in ppcemb-softmmu and the 32-bit stuff only in > ppc-softmmu instead? That way we could, for example, also make the > output of "-cpu help" and "-device help" a little bit more user friendly...
I tend to agree.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
