On 1/14/26 10:19, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
This doesn't imply we should automatically rip it out, but if we see no evidence of (3) for a prolonged period of time, and no sign of it being used downstream in any way, it is worth considering the cost / benefit.In the case of NetBSD something must be working to some extent since it appears that 10.1.0 QEMU is present in the pkg repos: https://pkgsrc.se/emulators/qemu so that argues against ripping stuff out even if we notice breakage.
And indeed their pkgsrc has the same patch that Philippe has now submitted for inclusion in qemu.git: https://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/pkgsrc/emulators/qemu/patches/patch-target_i386_nvmm_nvmm-all.c.diff?r1=1.10;r2=1.11 ---- target/i386/nvmm/nvmm-all.c.orig 2024-11-20 22:48:05.000000000 +0000 +--- target/i386/nvmm/nvmm-all.c.orig 2025-08-26 18:32:38.000000000 +0000 +++ target/i386/nvmm/nvmm-all.c -@@ -1057,7 +1057,11 @@ nvmm_process_section(MemoryRegionSection +@@ -984,7 +984,7 @@ nvmm_init_vcpu(CPUState *cpu) + } + } + +- qcpu->vcpu_dirty = true; ++ cpu->vcpu_dirty = true; + cpu->accel = qcpu; + + return 0; +@@ -1059,7 +1059,11 @@ nvmm_process_section(MemoryRegionSection unsigned int delta; uintptr_t hva;
