On Tue, 2023-11-21 at 19:26 +0100, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > On 11/21/23 17:36, Miles Glenn wrote: > > On Tue, 2023-11-21 at 08:29 +0100, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > > > On 11/21/23 02:33, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > > > On Tue Nov 21, 2023 at 9:51 AM AEST, Glenn Miles wrote: > > > > > Create a new powernv machine type, powernv10-rainier, that > > > > > will contain rainier-specific devices. > > > > > > > > Is the plan to have a base powernv10 common to all and then > > > > powernv10-rainier looks like a Rainier? Or would powernv10 > > > > just be a rainier? > > > > > > > > It's fine to structure code this way, I'm just wondering about > > > > the machine types available to user. Is a base powernv10 > > > > machine > > > > useful to run? > > > > > > There are multiple P10 boards defined in Linux : > > > > > > aspeed-bmc-ibm-bonnell.dts > > > aspeed-bmc-ibm-everest.dts > > > aspeed-bmc-ibm-rainier-1s4u.dts > > > aspeed-bmc-ibm-rainier-4u.dts > > > aspeed-bmc-ibm-rainier.dts > > > > > > and we could model the machines above with a fixed number of > > > sockets. > > > The "powernv10" would be the generic system that can be > > > customized > > > at will on the command line, even I2C devices. There is also the > > > P10 Denali which is FSP based. This QEMU machine would certainly > > > be > > > very different. I thought of doing the same for P9 with a -zaius > > > and include NPU2 models for it. I lacked time and the interest > > > was > > > small at the time of OpenPOWER. > > > > > > Anyhow, adding a new machine makes sense and it prepares ground > > > for > > > possible new ones. I am OK with or without. As primary users, you > > > are > > > the ones that can tell if there will be a second machine. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > C. > > > > > > > I am not sure what the powernv10 machine would be used for. The > > only reason I kept it was because I didn't want to break anyone out > > there that might be using it. > (previous email sent to fast) > > You would need to go through the deprecation process [1] if you want > to remove the machine. I suggest keeping it for now since it is two > lines of type definition. >
Yes, I agree. > > My preference would have been to just make powernv10-rainier an > > alias of the powernv10 machine, but only one alias name per machine > > is supported and there is already a plan to make "powernv" an > > alias for the powernv10 machine. > > yes. It might be time now for PowerNV and pSeries to update the > default processor. Let's address that in the QEMU 9.0 cycle. > > Thanks, > > C. > > [1] https://qemu.readthedocs.io/en/v8.1.0/about/deprecated.html > Sounds good, thanks! Glenn