On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 05:08:57PM +0100, Greg Kurz wrote: > On Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:08:18 +1100 > David Gibson <da...@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 08:41:03PM +0100, Greg Kurz wrote: > > <snip> > > > > > > > It breaks migration of pre-2.7 machine types with unusual CPU topologies, > > > but I guess this is an acceptable trade-off. > > > > No, not really. Weird topologies are still allowed on old machine > > types for backwards compatibility, and we shouldn't break that. I > > like the idea of consolidating this calculation, but we can't do it by > > just breaking the older machines (at least not until they're formally > > deprecated). > > > > Heh, I had put this patch at the end because I was expecting you might > nack it :) > > Per curiosity, when/how do we decide that an older machine type may be > formally deprecated ?
For versioned machine types we decided that we'd keep them around upstream for as long as they were needed by a downstream vendor, *provided* that downstream vendor is contributing to QEMU in order to mitigate the maint burden it would entail. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
