On Mon, 13 Sept 2021 at 12:32, Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi > > On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 4:34 PM Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 7 Sept 2021 at 13:23, <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > >> > From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com> >> > >> > I was looking for such documentation, but couldn't find it. >> >> Yes; this is definitely something we should document, and in >> the build-platforms doc is as good a place as any. >> >> > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lur...@redhat.com> >> > --- >> > docs/about/build-platforms.rst | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > meson.build | 2 +- >> > 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/docs/about/build-platforms.rst >> > b/docs/about/build-platforms.rst >> > index 692323609e..bfe90e574e 100644 >> > --- a/docs/about/build-platforms.rst >> > +++ b/docs/about/build-platforms.rst >> > @@ -29,6 +29,34 @@ The `Repology`_ site is a useful resource to identify >> > currently shipped versions of software in various operating systems, >> > though it does not cover all distros listed below. >> > >> > +Supported host CPUs >> > +------------------- >> > + >> > +Those host CPUs have a native TCG backend and are regularly tested: >> >> This is a list of host architectures, not CPUs. > > > Isn't it CPU architecture we are talking about? (CPU for short in the title)
My point is that "CPU" != "CPU architecture". "CPU" is something like "Skylake" or "Cortex-A15". "CPU architecture" is "x86-64", "arm", etc. >> The table also seems to me to be a bit confusing, because >> the introductory text suggests it's a list of the TCG >> support for each architecture, but the table itself lists >> only the non-TCG accelerators. I think we should just list >> all the accelerators supported for each host architecture. > > > All the architectures we support (in the list) have proper TCG, right? Yes. thanks -- PMM
