On 5/28/2025 4:11 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 28/05/2025 05.01, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
On 5/12/2025 4:39 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
(series reviewed)

Since v3:
- Fixed 2 issues noticed by Thomas (floppy fallback, e1000)

Since v2:
- Removed qtest in test-x86-cpuid-compat.c

Since v1:
- Fixed issues noticed by Thomas

The versioned 'pc' and 'q35' machines up to 2.12 been marked
as deprecated two releases ago, and are older than 6 years,
so according to our support policy we can remove them.

This series only includes the 2.4 and 2.5 machines removal,
as it is a big enough number of LoC removed. Rest will
follow. Highlight is the legacy fw_cfg API removal :)

Overall it looks good to me, except the below 4 patches
   target/i386/cpu: Remove X86CPU::check_cpuid field

This one gets hard NAK because it changes the default behavior of QEMU.

   hw/net/e1000: Remove unused E1000_FLAG_MAC flag
   hw/virtio/virtio-pci: Remove VIRTIO_PCI_FLAG_MIGRATE_EXTRA definition
   hw/block/fdc-isa: Remove 'fallback' property

I'm not sure about the three. Because Unlike other properties removed by this series, the property name removed by above three patches don't have a 'x-' prefix.

It should be OK to remove properties with 'x-' prefix, but I'm not sure about the ones without it. There might be user using them explicitly. If so, remove them needs to go through standard deprecation process.

As discussed in another thread, we have a lot of properties that are meant for internal use, though they are exposed to the user (and "x-" was originally meant for experimental properties, not for internal ones). I assume these properties here are such internal ones, so I think it should be ok to remove them now without explicit deprecation. We did this in the past already for the older pc machine types, too, and so far nobody ever complained AFAIK. So I suggest to remove them now, and if someone comlains, we can still revert the corresponding patch.

I'm fine with it since nobody explicitly rejects the removal as I did for "target/i386/cpu: Remove X86CPU::check_cpuid field"

  Thomas



Reply via email to