On Thu, May 08, 2025 at 12:40:35PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 12:40:35 +0200
> From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@linaro.org>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 12/19] hw/i386/pc: Remove pc_compat_2_7[] array
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On 8/5/25 09:55, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > On 02/05/2025 20.56, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > > The pc_compat_2_7[] array was only used by the pc-q35-2.7
> > > and pc-i440fx-2.7 machines, which got removed. Remove it.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@linaro.org>
> > > Reviewed-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.caveayl...@nutanix.com>
> > > ---
> > > include/hw/i386/pc.h | 3 ---
> > > hw/i386/pc.c | 10 ----------
> > > 2 files changed, 13 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/hw/i386/pc.h b/include/hw/i386/pc.h
> > > index 4fb2033bc54..319ec82f709 100644
> > > --- a/include/hw/i386/pc.h
> > > +++ b/include/hw/i386/pc.h
> > > @@ -289,9 +289,6 @@ extern const size_t pc_compat_2_9_len;
> > > extern GlobalProperty pc_compat_2_8[];
> > > extern const size_t pc_compat_2_8_len;
> > > -extern GlobalProperty pc_compat_2_7[];
> > > -extern const size_t pc_compat_2_7_len;
> > > -
> > > #define DEFINE_PC_MACHINE(suffix, namestr, initfn, optsfn) \
> > > static void pc_machine_##suffix##_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, \
> > > const void *data) \
> > > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c
> > > index 7573b880905..ee7095c89a8 100644
> > > --- a/hw/i386/pc.c
> > > +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c
> > > @@ -241,16 +241,6 @@ GlobalProperty pc_compat_2_8[] = {
> > > };
> > > const size_t pc_compat_2_8_len = G_N_ELEMENTS(pc_compat_2_8);
> > > -GlobalProperty pc_compat_2_7[] = {
> > > - { TYPE_X86_CPU, "l3-cache", "off" },
> > > - { TYPE_X86_CPU, "full-cpuid-auto-level", "off" },
> > > - { "Opteron_G3" "-" TYPE_X86_CPU, "family", "15" },
> > > - { "Opteron_G3" "-" TYPE_X86_CPU, "model", "6" },
> > > - { "Opteron_G3" "-" TYPE_X86_CPU, "stepping", "1" },
> > > - { "isa-pcspk", "migrate", "off" },
> > > -};
> > > -const size_t pc_compat_2_7_len = G_N_ELEMENTS(pc_compat_2_7);
> >
> > I'd really appreciate if you could provide clean-up patches for
> > TYPE_X86_CPU, too. Otherwise I'm pretty sure we'll forget that there is
> > some clean up possibility here.
>
> Well TBH it is too exhausting to keep rebasing these patches without
> feedback from maintainers. I'll respin a v4 with Zhao and your comments
> addressed but without touching the TYPE_X86_CPU properties. If
> maintainers prefer to remove dead code in one go -- something I
> certainly understand from a maintainer PoV -- I'll let someone else
> do it, taking over my series.
Hi Philippe, I think I could volunteer help you to revisit the history
of these properties (they're also too old for me :-)), and help identify
if these properties should be removed or at least list the potential
issues. Hopefully I can do this.
Thanks,
Zhao
