On 05/17/2018 04:15 PM, Jiri Denemark wrote:
> On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 12:48:42 -0500, Chris Venteicher wrote:
>> Some architectures (S390) depend on QEMU to compute baseline CPU model.
>> Interacting with QEMU requires starting the QEMU process and completing one
>> more query-cpu-model-baseline QMP exchanges with QEMU.
>> This patch set depends on qemuMonitorGetCPUModelBaseline function exposed by
>> "query-cpu-model-baseline QMP Command" patch set discussed previously on
> Since patch 1/7 changes some code introduced in the series implementing
> query-cpu-model-baseline support, please send patches for both series at
> once next time and (as already suggested by Collin) squash the changes
> to the patches which introduced the code you're fixing here in 1/7.
> Overall, I think the approach of making the monitor API work on
> CPUModelInfo is better than the one using CPUDef because the monitor
> code in general does not have all data it could potentially need to
> perform the translation.
I can agree with this. qemuMonitorCPUModelInfo is simpler and has everything
I also concur with your response to 2/7. Translating ModelInfo -> CPUDef
and using the existing CPUDef -> XML functions is the way to go.
Since we're getting a closer to an agreement on how this API should work,
I could respin my comparison patches with what we've learned thus far to
see how they look. Otherwise, I have no problem waiting until we come up
with something more definitive -- I have plenty to keep me busy in the
> libvir-list mailing list
- Collin Walling
libvir-list mailing list