On 05/22/2013 08:29 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: > >> On 22 May 2013 14:15, Anthony Liguori <aligu...@us.ibm.com> wrote: >>> Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> writes: >>>> You >>>> don't need to know what targets were supported in the version that you >>>> compiled from. Only one target is supported in this executable >>>> anyway. >>> >>> It seems useful to me. One day we may support multiple targets per >>> executable. >> >> Why would you care about which architectures the executable supports? >> What you actually want to know is which machine models are supported; >> whether board foo happens to be ARM or PPC isn't really very interesting >> IMHO. > > That's a very good point. It was the libvirt folks that requested > this. Perhaps they can shed some light on the logic?
I think knowing the architecture (such as x86 vs. pseries ppc) is used by libvirt to know what default devices the board supports (for example, whether usb is present by default). There's probably still room for improvement for communication between libvirt and qemu on what exactly is being supported, and knowing an architecture type may be too broad of a knob compared to what is really wanted, except that I don't have a good handle on what is really wanted. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
