On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 03:49:31PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 3:41 PM Claudio Fontana <cfont...@suse.de> wrote: > > > > On 10/4/23 14:37, Thomas Huth wrote: > > > On 04/10/2023 14.33, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > >> Am I mis-understanding what you mean by 'finishes' here, as > > >> I see many references to softmmu remaining > > >> In particular under configs/ > > >> > > >> I was also hoping it meant that we'd be changing configure > > >> to allow > > >> > > >> configure --target-list=x86_64-system > > >> configure --target-list=x86_64-vm > > >> > > >> for less typing > > > > > > Maybe we should also bikeshed about the naming first... "system" is a > > > quite > > > overloaded word in this context already, and "vm" sounds rather like > > > hardware-accelerated stuff ... what about using something like "sysemu"? > > > Or > > > "fullsys" for "full system emulation" (in contrast to "user space"-only > > > emulation)? > > I agree that changing other remnants should be done right > after this patch, for example $softmmu in configure. Changing > all targets is a very large and very user-visible change, it is > required but it should be planned very well. > > As to the actual target names, I think system is the only > consistent choice since we have --enable/--disable-system > (as pointed out by Claudio) and qemu-system-*. sysemu > may make a little more sense in the codebase (we have > include/sysemu after all), but maybe that ship has sailed > since we have many occurrences of "system", for example > system_ss and other related sourcesets.
Yep, I agree with that view now, lets stick with 'system'. With 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 :|
