On 03/25/2013 08:15 AM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
>>
>> Such changes have been rejected in the past (e.g., n270 Atom).
>> I personally wouldn't object to 486 changes, but I guess it should
>> rather be handled via Igor's CPU static properties that I have in my
>> review queue: The .model value would be set to 8 but the PC machine
>> would be changed alongside to set model = 0 for pc-1.4 and earlier.
> It doesn't relates to property refactoring nor to slim CPU sub-classes
> conversion either. So it could go in independently.
>
> But is this change safe from migration POV?
>
Well, given that the CPU model presented is actually closer to a model 8
than a model 0 it probably is... but the real question is what would
cause someone to do migration of a 486 CPU model.
The n270 issue is problematic, because right now "n270" can't actually
run software compiled for N270...
-hpa
