On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:02:07 +0100
Viktor Mihajlovski <mihaj...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On 08.02.2018 17:22, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 16:52:28 +0100
> > Viktor Mihajlovski <mihaj...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> >> diff --git a/qapi-schema.json b/qapi-schema.json
> >> index 12c7dc8..0b36860 100644
> >> --- a/qapi-schema.json
> >> +++ b/qapi-schema.json
> >> @@ -607,7 +607,27 @@
> >> ##
> >> { 'struct': 'CpuInfo2',
> >> 'data': {'cpu-index': 'int', '*halted': 'bool', 'qom-path': 'str',
> >> - 'thread-id': 'int', '*props': 'CpuInstanceProperties' } }
> >> + 'thread-id': 'int', '*props': 'CpuInstanceProperties',
> >> + '*archdata': 'CpuInfoArchData' } }
> >> +
> >> +##
> >> +# @CpuInfoArchData:
> >> +#
> >> +# Architecure specific information about a virtual CPU
> >> +#
> >> +# Since: 2.12
> >> +#
> >> +##
> >> +{ 'union': 'CpuInfoArchData',
> >> + 'base': { 'arch': 'CpuInfoArch' },
> >> + 'discriminator': 'arch',
> >> + 'data': { 'x86': 'CpuInfoOther',
> >> + 'sparc': 'CpuInfoOther',
> >> + 'ppc': 'CpuInfoOther',
> >> + 'mips': 'CpuInfoOther',
> >> + 'tricore': 'CpuInfoOther',
> >> + 's390': 'CpuInfoS390',
> >> + 'other': 'CpuInfoOther' } }
> >>
> >> ##
> >> # @query-cpus-fast:
> >
> > I don't think you need CpuInfoArchData, you can have S390CpuState
> > instead and ignore the other archs. It's not like all archs data
> > can be returned at the same time, and also you start having to
> > replicate that arch string list everywhere. Lastly, the arch name
> > is returned by query-target, so no need to duplicate that one either.
> >
> I don't think I really understood your suggestion. Was it to assume that
> only s390 will have arch-specific data?. I.e. something along the lines of
> - 'thread-id': 'int', '*props': 'CpuInstanceProperties' } }
> + 'thread-id': 'int', '*props': 'CpuInstanceProperties',
> + '*archdata': 'CpuInfoS390' } }
>
> or some kind of in-line, anonymous union? I have to confess I'm pretty
> QAPI-illiterate, so I may have done it overly complicated. At least it
> feels that way.
Yes, what you propose above is what I had in mind. Maybe the QAPI has
some better way to do it though.
