[PATCH v2 0/2] ppc: Rename power5+ and power7+ for the new QOM naming rules
We can get rid of the "power5+" / "power7+" hack in qom/object.c by using CPU aliases for those names instead (first patch). I think in the long run, we should get rid of the names with a "+" in it completely, so the second patch suggests to deprecate those, but I'd also be fine if we keep the aliases around, so in that case please ignore the second patch. v2: - Use "power5p" / "power7p" instead of "power5plus" / "power7plus" Thomas Huth (2): target/ppc/cpu-models: Rename power5+ and power7+ for new QOM naming rules docs/about: Deprecate the old "power5+" and "power7+" CPU names docs/about/deprecated.rst | 9 +++++++++ hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c | 4 ++-- qom/object.c | 4 ---- target/ppc/cpu-models.c | 10 ++++++---- 4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) -- 2.43.0
The character "+" is now forbidden in QOM device names (see commit b447378e1217 - "Limit type names to alphanumerical and some few special characters"). For the "power5+" and "power7+" CPU names, there is currently a hack in type_name_is_valid() to still allow them for compatibility reasons. However, there is a much nicer solution for this: Simply use aliases! This way we can still support the old names without the need for the ugly hack in type_name_is_valid(). Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> --- hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c | 4 ++-- qom/object.c | 4 ---- target/ppc/cpu-models.c | 10 ++++++---- 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c index 5aa1ed474a..0c0fb3f1b0 100644 --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c @@ -389,9 +389,9 @@ static const TypeInfo spapr_cpu_core_type_infos[] = { DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("970_v2.2"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("970mp_v1.0"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("970mp_v1.1"), - DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power5+_v2.1"), + DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power5p_v2.1"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power7_v2.3"), - DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power7+_v2.1"), + DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power7p_v2.1"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power8_v2.0"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power8e_v2.1"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power8nvl_v1.0"), diff --git a/qom/object.c b/qom/object.c index 654e1afaf2..2c4c64d2b6 100644 --- a/qom/object.c +++ b/qom/object.c @@ -160,10 +160,6 @@ static bool type_name_is_valid(const char *name) /* Allow some legacy names with '+' in it for compatibility reasons */ if (name[plen] == '+') { - if (plen == 6 && g_str_has_prefix(name, "power")) { - /* Allow "power5+" and "power7+" CPU names*/ - return true; - } if (plen >= 17 && g_str_has_prefix(name, "Sun-UltraSparc-I")) { /* Allow "Sun-UltraSparc-IV+" and "Sun-UltraSparc-IIIi+" */ return true; diff --git a/target/ppc/cpu-models.c b/target/ppc/cpu-models.c index 7dbb47de64..36e465b390 100644 --- a/target/ppc/cpu-models.c +++ b/target/ppc/cpu-models.c @@ -716,11 +716,11 @@ "PowerPC 970MP v1.0") POWERPC_DEF("970mp_v1.1", CPU_POWERPC_970MP_v11, 970, "PowerPC 970MP v1.1") - POWERPC_DEF("power5+_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER5P_v21, POWER5P, + POWERPC_DEF("power5p_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER5P_v21, POWER5P, "POWER5+ v2.1") POWERPC_DEF("power7_v2.3", CPU_POWERPC_POWER7_v23, POWER7, "POWER7 v2.3") - POWERPC_DEF("power7+_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER7P_v21, POWER7, + POWERPC_DEF("power7p_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER7P_v21, POWER7, "POWER7+ v2.1") POWERPC_DEF("power8e_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER8E_v21, POWER8, "POWER8E v2.1") @@ -902,10 +902,12 @@ PowerPCCPUAlias ppc_cpu_aliases[] = { { "970", "970_v2.2" }, { "970fx", "970fx_v3.1" }, { "970mp", "970mp_v1.1" }, - { "power5+", "power5+_v2.1" }, + { "power5+", "power5p_v2.1" }, + { "power5+_v2.1", "power5p_v2.1" }, { "power5gs", "power5+_v2.1" }, { "power7", "power7_v2.3" }, - { "power7+", "power7+_v2.1" }, + { "power7+", "power7p_v2.1" }, + { "power7+_v2.1", "power7p_v2.1" }, { "power8e", "power8e_v2.1" }, { "power8", "power8_v2.0" }, { "power8nvl", "power8nvl_v1.0" }, -- 2.43.0
On 1/17/24 15:10, Thomas Huth wrote:
The character "+" is now forbidden in QOM device names (see commit b447378e1217 - "Limit type names to alphanumerical and some few special characters"). For the "power5+" and "power7+" CPU names, there is currently a hack in type_name_is_valid() to still allow them for compatibility reasons. However, there is a much nicer solution for this: Simply use aliases! This way we can still support the old names without the need for the ugly hack in type_name_is_valid().
Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org> Thanks, C.
--- hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c | 4 ++-- qom/object.c | 4 ---- target/ppc/cpu-models.c | 10 ++++++---- 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c index 5aa1ed474a..0c0fb3f1b0 100644 --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c @@ -389,9 +389,9 @@ static const TypeInfo spapr_cpu_core_type_infos[] = { DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("970_v2.2"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("970mp_v1.0"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("970mp_v1.1"), - DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power5+_v2.1"), + DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power5p_v2.1"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power7_v2.3"), - DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power7+_v2.1"), + DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power7p_v2.1"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power8_v2.0"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power8e_v2.1"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power8nvl_v1.0"), diff --git a/qom/object.c b/qom/object.c index 654e1afaf2..2c4c64d2b6 100644 --- a/qom/object.c +++ b/qom/object.c @@ -160,10 +160,6 @@ static bool type_name_is_valid(const char *name)
/* Allow some legacy names with '+' in it for compatibility reasons */ if (name[plen] == '+') { - if (plen == 6 && g_str_has_prefix(name, "power")) { - /* Allow "power5+" and "power7+" CPU names*/ - return true; - } if (plen >= 17 && g_str_has_prefix(name, "Sun-UltraSparc-I")) { /* Allow "Sun-UltraSparc-IV+" and "Sun-UltraSparc-IIIi+" */ return true; diff --git a/target/ppc/cpu-models.c b/target/ppc/cpu-models.c index 7dbb47de64..36e465b390 100644 --- a/target/ppc/cpu-models.c +++ b/target/ppc/cpu-models.c @@ -716,11 +716,11 @@ "PowerPC 970MP v1.0") POWERPC_DEF("970mp_v1.1", CPU_POWERPC_970MP_v11, 970, "PowerPC 970MP v1.1") - POWERPC_DEF("power5+_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER5P_v21, POWER5P, + POWERPC_DEF("power5p_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER5P_v21, POWER5P, "POWER5+ v2.1") POWERPC_DEF("power7_v2.3", CPU_POWERPC_POWER7_v23, POWER7, "POWER7 v2.3") - POWERPC_DEF("power7+_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER7P_v21, POWER7, + POWERPC_DEF("power7p_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER7P_v21, POWER7, "POWER7+ v2.1") POWERPC_DEF("power8e_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER8E_v21, POWER8, "POWER8E v2.1") @@ -902,10 +902,12 @@ PowerPCCPUAlias ppc_cpu_aliases[] = { { "970", "970_v2.2" }, { "970fx", "970fx_v3.1" }, { "970mp", "970mp_v1.1" }, - { "power5+", "power5+_v2.1" }, + { "power5+", "power5p_v2.1" }, + { "power5+_v2.1", "power5p_v2.1" }, { "power5gs", "power5+_v2.1" }, { "power7", "power7_v2.3" }, - { "power7+", "power7+_v2.1" }, + { "power7+", "power7p_v2.1" }, + { "power7+_v2.1", "power7p_v2.1" }, { "power8e", "power8e_v2.1" }, { "power8", "power8_v2.0" }, { "power8nvl", "power8nvl_v1.0" },
On 1/17/24 19:40, Thomas Huth wrote:
The character "+" is now forbidden in QOM device names (see commit b447378e1217 - "Limit type names to alphanumerical and some few special characters"). For the "power5+" and "power7+" CPU names, there is currently a hack in type_name_is_valid() to still allow them for compatibility reasons. However, there is a much nicer solution for this: Simply use aliases! This way we can still support the old names without the need for the ugly hack in type_name_is_valid().
Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Harsh Prateek Bora <harshpb@linux.ibm.com>
--- hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c | 4 ++-- qom/object.c | 4 ---- target/ppc/cpu-models.c | 10 ++++++---- 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c index 5aa1ed474a..0c0fb3f1b0 100644 --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_cpu_core.c @@ -389,9 +389,9 @@ static const TypeInfo spapr_cpu_core_type_infos[] = { DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("970_v2.2"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("970mp_v1.0"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("970mp_v1.1"), - DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power5+_v2.1"), + DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power5p_v2.1"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power7_v2.3"), - DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power7+_v2.1"), + DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power7p_v2.1"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power8_v2.0"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power8e_v2.1"), DEFINE_SPAPR_CPU_CORE_TYPE("power8nvl_v1.0"), diff --git a/qom/object.c b/qom/object.c index 654e1afaf2..2c4c64d2b6 100644 --- a/qom/object.c +++ b/qom/object.c @@ -160,10 +160,6 @@ static bool type_name_is_valid(const char *name)
/* Allow some legacy names with '+' in it for compatibility reasons */ if (name[plen] == '+') { - if (plen == 6 && g_str_has_prefix(name, "power")) { - /* Allow "power5+" and "power7+" CPU names*/ - return true; - } if (plen >= 17 && g_str_has_prefix(name, "Sun-UltraSparc-I")) { /* Allow "Sun-UltraSparc-IV+" and "Sun-UltraSparc-IIIi+" */ return true; diff --git a/target/ppc/cpu-models.c b/target/ppc/cpu-models.c index 7dbb47de64..36e465b390 100644 --- a/target/ppc/cpu-models.c +++ b/target/ppc/cpu-models.c @@ -716,11 +716,11 @@ "PowerPC 970MP v1.0") POWERPC_DEF("970mp_v1.1", CPU_POWERPC_970MP_v11, 970, "PowerPC 970MP v1.1") - POWERPC_DEF("power5+_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER5P_v21, POWER5P, + POWERPC_DEF("power5p_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER5P_v21, POWER5P, "POWER5+ v2.1") POWERPC_DEF("power7_v2.3", CPU_POWERPC_POWER7_v23, POWER7, "POWER7 v2.3") - POWERPC_DEF("power7+_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER7P_v21, POWER7, + POWERPC_DEF("power7p_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER7P_v21, POWER7, "POWER7+ v2.1") POWERPC_DEF("power8e_v2.1", CPU_POWERPC_POWER8E_v21, POWER8, "POWER8E v2.1") @@ -902,10 +902,12 @@ PowerPCCPUAlias ppc_cpu_aliases[] = { { "970", "970_v2.2" }, { "970fx", "970fx_v3.1" }, { "970mp", "970mp_v1.1" }, - { "power5+", "power5+_v2.1" }, + { "power5+", "power5p_v2.1" }, + { "power5+_v2.1", "power5p_v2.1" }, { "power5gs", "power5+_v2.1" }, { "power7", "power7_v2.3" }, - { "power7+", "power7+_v2.1" }, + { "power7+", "power7p_v2.1" }, + { "power7+_v2.1", "power7p_v2.1" }, { "power8e", "power8e_v2.1" }, { "power8", "power8_v2.0" }, { "power8nvl", "power8nvl_v1.0" },
For consistency we should drop the names with a "+" in it in the long run. Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> --- docs/about/deprecated.rst | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/docs/about/deprecated.rst b/docs/about/deprecated.rst index b47763330c..251723d264 100644 --- a/docs/about/deprecated.rst +++ b/docs/about/deprecated.rst @@ -217,6 +217,15 @@ Nios II CPU (since 8.2) The Nios II architecture is orphan. The ``nios2`` guest CPU support is deprecated and will be removed in a future version of QEMU. +``power5+`` and ``power7+`` CPU names (since 9.0) +''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' + +The character "+" in device (and thus also CPU) names is not allowed +in the QEMU object model anymore. ``power5+``, ``power5+_v2.1``, +``power7+`` and ``power7+_v2.1`` are currently still supported via +an alias, but for consistency these will get removed in a future +release, too. Use ``power5p_v2.1`` and ``power7p_v2.1`` instead. + System emulator machines ------------------------ -- 2.43.0
On 17/1/24 15:10, Thomas Huth wrote:
For consistency we should drop the names with a "+" in it in the long run.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> --- docs/about/deprecated.rst | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
On 1/17/24 15:10, Thomas Huth wrote:
For consistency we should drop the names with a "+" in it in the long run.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org> Thanks, C.
--- docs/about/deprecated.rst | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/docs/about/deprecated.rst b/docs/about/deprecated.rst index b47763330c..251723d264 100644 --- a/docs/about/deprecated.rst +++ b/docs/about/deprecated.rst @@ -217,6 +217,15 @@ Nios II CPU (since 8.2) The Nios II architecture is orphan. The ``nios2`` guest CPU support is deprecated and will be removed in a future version of QEMU.
+``power5+`` and ``power7+`` CPU names (since 9.0) +''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' + +The character "+" in device (and thus also CPU) names is not allowed +in the QEMU object model anymore. ``power5+``, ``power5+_v2.1``, +``power7+`` and ``power7+_v2.1`` are currently still supported via +an alias, but for consistency these will get removed in a future +release, too. Use ``power5p_v2.1`` and ``power7p_v2.1`` instead. +
System emulator machines ------------------------
On 1/17/24 19:40, Thomas Huth wrote:
For consistency we should drop the names with a "+" in it in the long run.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Harsh Prateek Bora <harshpb@linux.ibm.com>
--- docs/about/deprecated.rst | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/docs/about/deprecated.rst b/docs/about/deprecated.rst index b47763330c..251723d264 100644 --- a/docs/about/deprecated.rst +++ b/docs/about/deprecated.rst @@ -217,6 +217,15 @@ Nios II CPU (since 8.2) The Nios II architecture is orphan. The ``nios2`` guest CPU support is deprecated and will be removed in a future version of QEMU.
+``power5+`` and ``power7+`` CPU names (since 9.0) +''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' + +The character "+" in device (and thus also CPU) names is not allowed +in the QEMU object model anymore. ``power5+``, ``power5+_v2.1``, +``power7+`` and ``power7+_v2.1`` are currently still supported via +an alias, but for consistency these will get removed in a future +release, too. Use ``power5p_v2.1`` and ``power7p_v2.1`` instead. +
System emulator machines ------------------------
participants (4)
-
Cédric Le Goater -
Harsh Prateek Bora -
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé -
Thomas Huth