On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 09:34:08 +0200
David Hildenbrand <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 25.07.2018 01:02, Collin Walling wrote:
> > Thanks for expanding on what the "max" model name is suppose to be. I
> > wonder if a
> > s/"qemu"/"max" in QEMU would suffice (I'm taking a shot in the dark here.)
>
> Nope, it dynamically has to map to qemu/host depending on the
> accelerator. But it also has to be a valid QOM object ("max-s390x-cpu").
>
> >
> > @Connie, @David, you both are far more knowledgeable in this area than I
> > am. What
> > do either of you suggest for moving forward with this? Should we forward
> > this
> > discussion on qemu-devel?
> >
>
> I can have a look if nobody else wants to tackle it.
I'll gladly merge a patch :)
This is probably 3.1 material, so libvirt will need compat handling for
it, I guess.
--
libvir-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
