On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 at 16:06, Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> wrote:
> I've seen others asking why you print type name instead of shorter cpu-model
> used on CLI. To do that would make you write a patch to implement reverse
> mapping.
> In some cases it's simple, in others plain impossible unless you can get
> access to -cpu foo stored somewhere.
>
> What I don't particularity like about adding reverse type->cpu_model mapping,
> is that it would complicate code to carter to QEMU's interface
> inconsistencies.
> And if you do it easy way (instead of fixing every target) touching only ARM,
> it will be spotty at best and just add to technical debt elsewhere ->
> more inconsistencies.
>
> What I'm proposing is for you to keep printing type names.
> So if others won't object to type names I'm more or less fine with your
> current approach.
I do object to type names, because the UI for choosing
a CPU ("-cpu whatever") does not take type names, it
takes CPU names. The QOM type names that those end up
being under the hood are a detail of QEMU's implementation
that we shouldn't expose to users in the help messages.
> Instead of adding type->cpu_model mapping (it's not the first time
> this particular question had arisen - there were similar patches before
> on qemu-devel), get rid of shortened cpu_model in user interface (-cpu)
> altogether and use CPU type name there.
I also think we should not do this, because it will break
a ton of existing command lines, and it's not clear it
has any benefit to users.
thanks
-- PMM
