Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Report the QEMU vendor/arch IDs on virtual CPUs

2024-02-02 Thread Daniel Henrique Barboza
On 1/31/24 15:24, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: Right now we just report 0 for marchid/mvendorid in QEMU. That's legal, but it's tricky for users that want to check if they're running on QEMU to do so. This sets marchid to 42, which I've proposed as the QEMU architecture ID (mvendorid remains 0, jus

Re: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Report the QEMU vendor/arch IDs on virtual CPUs

2024-02-02 Thread Andrew Jones
On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 04:06:15PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: > On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 10:24:30AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > Right now we just report 0 for marchid/mvendorid in QEMU. That's legal, > > but it's tricky for users that want to check if they're running on QEMU > > to do so. Thi

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Report the QEMU vendor/arch IDs on virtual CPUs

2024-02-01 Thread Alistair Francis
On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 5:33 AM Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > Right now we just report 0 for marchid/mvendorid in QEMU. That's legal, > but it's tricky for users that want to check if they're running on QEMU > to do so. This sets marchid to 42, which I've proposed as the QEMU > architecture ID (mvend

Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Report the QEMU vendor/arch IDs on virtual CPUs

2024-02-01 Thread Andrew Jones
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 10:24:30AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > Right now we just report 0 for marchid/mvendorid in QEMU. That's legal, > but it's tricky for users that want to check if they're running on QEMU > to do so. This sets marchid to 42, which I've proposed as the QEMU > architecture I