Re: [Qemu-devel] Dropped CPU feature names and backward compatibility

2018-09-19 Thread Eduardo Habkost
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 07:09:24PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 19/09/2018 18:36, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 05:35:20PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> On 18/09/2018 16:22, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 04:02:54PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >>>

Re: [Qemu-devel] Dropped CPU feature names and backward compatibility

2018-09-19 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 19/09/2018 18:36, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 05:35:20PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> On 18/09/2018 16:22, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 04:02:54PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: On 18/09/2018 15:14, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > If it broke something

Re: [Qemu-devel] Dropped CPU feature names and backward compatibility

2018-09-19 Thread Eduardo Habkost
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 05:35:20PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 18/09/2018 16:22, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 04:02:54PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> On 18/09/2018 15:14, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >>> If it broke something, we should restore the option names and > >>>

Re: [Qemu-devel] Dropped CPU feature names and backward compatibility

2018-09-18 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 18/09/2018 16:22, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 04:02:54PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> On 18/09/2018 15:14, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >>> If it broke something, we should restore the option names and >>> declare them as deprecated. >> >> I think in this particular case it's ok

Re: [Qemu-devel] Dropped CPU feature names and backward compatibility

2018-09-18 Thread Eduardo Habkost
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 04:02:54PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 18/09/2018 15:14, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > If it broke something, we should restore the option names and > > declare them as deprecated. > > I think in this particular case it's okay to add them back as no-ops, > especially we'd

Re: [Qemu-devel] Dropped CPU feature names and backward compatibility

2018-09-18 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 18/09/2018 15:14, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > If it broke something, we should restore the option names and > declare them as deprecated. I think in this particular case it's okay to add them back as no-ops, especially we'd actually want them to be customizable for user-mode emulation. Paolo

Re: [Qemu-devel] Dropped CPU feature names and backward compatibility

2018-09-18 Thread Eduardo Habkost
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 03:26:18PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 10:14:45 -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 03:07:35PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote: > > > Sure, libvirt could just avoid passing feature=off for any feature which > > > is not supported by

Re: [Qemu-devel] Dropped CPU feature names and backward compatibility

2018-09-18 Thread Jiri Denemark
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 10:14:45 -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 03:07:35PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote: > > Sure, libvirt could just avoid passing feature=off for any feature which > > is not supported by the QEMU binary it is about to start since such > > feature should be

Re: [Qemu-devel] Dropped CPU feature names and backward compatibility

2018-09-18 Thread Eduardo Habkost
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 03:07:35PM +0200, Jiri Denemark wrote: > Hi, > > I noticed two x86_64 CPU features were removed from QEMU in 3.0.0: > - ospke removed by 9ccb9784b57 > - osxsave removed by f1a23522b03 > > More precisely, the CPUID bits are still there (and for example Icelake > CPU

[Qemu-devel] Dropped CPU feature names and backward compatibility

2018-09-18 Thread Jiri Denemark
Hi, I noticed two x86_64 CPU features were removed from QEMU in 3.0.0: - ospke removed by 9ccb9784b57 - osxsave removed by f1a23522b03 More precisely, the CPUID bits are still there (and for example Icelake CPU model has the ospke bit set), but the string representations were removed. Thu