On 7/29/21 4:59 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > On 7/29/21 4:22 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote: >> On 7/29/21 1:34 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>> On 7/29/21 12:44 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote: >>>> On 7/29/21 12:29 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>>> And another comment: I think we should have some progress on ARM with >>>>>> the kvm/tcg split and with the KConfig of boards, before we continue >>>>>> here. >>>>> >>>>> Why? This can easily be tacked in parallel. We can flip the switch >>>>> for modular tcg per target in meson.build. >>>>> >>>>> take care, >>>>> Gerd >>>>> >>>> >>>> Because in the end we need to do this for ARM too and for the other archs >>>> too (s390 is already ok), >>>> >>>> and in order to be sure not to end up in a dead-end, I think it would be >>>> good to have at least a sketch for the other archs as well.. >>>> >>>> Just my 2c ofc, I think really here still ARM is behind, and we should >>>> help it catch up. >>>> >>>> If I had more time I would have pushed more on the ARM series, but.. yeah. >>> >>> IIUC Alex is waiting 6.2 release to respin. >>> >> >> How does the Kconfig for ARM improvements go? I mean I think those >> improvements (enabling only compatible boards with the chosen accelerators) >> are important for both tcg-kvm split and possibly for modularization of ARM >> accelerators too right? > > I think we all (Alex/you/me) reached the same point where builds work > but current the testing framework isn't ready for non-TCG or > modularized-TCG so the CI ends failing. > > I don't want to push for 'CI build-only' because most of the annoying > problems were from runtime (interfaces not resolved, ... which are > important when using modules or board with unavailable devices). > > I tried to address that with a QMP command to query accelerators but > there is a disagreement whether we should query for available/built-in/ > loaded/modularized-but-not-installed/...). At this point I think I > fairly understand the technical problems but misunderstand the big > picture here, in particular w.r.t. management apps. I spent too many > time on this to appear enthusiastic, sorry. >
The Kconfig thing also depended on the querying the accelerator part, or not? I mean, was there the idea was "I want to build only the ARM boards that are compatible with the accel options I chose", which is totally sensible, and removes all the need for workarounds in the tcg/kvm split series Alex is now maintaining. I think you actually had a solution for quering the accelerators btw, and the problem was just caching the result to improve the performance? Thanks, Claudio
