On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 05:05:06PM +0800, Hongbo Zhang wrote: > On 25 July 2018 at 16:48, Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 01:30:52PM +0800, Hongbo Zhang wrote: > >> For the Aarch64, there is one machine 'virt', it is primarily meant to > >> run on KVM and execute virtualization workloads, but we need an > >> environment as faithful as possible to physical hardware, for supporting > >> firmware and OS development for pysical Aarch64 machines. > >> > >> This patch introduces new machine type 'Enterprise' with main features: > > > > The 'enterprise' name is really awful - this is essentially a marketing > > term completely devoid of any useful meaning. > > > > You had previously called this "sbsa" which IIUC was related to a real > > world hardware specification that it was based on. IOW, I think this old > > name was preferrable to calling it "enterprise". > > > Thanks for your comments. > Frankly, I myself prefer to 'sbsa' too, in fact, at the early stage of > developing, we called this 'enterprise', but later I changed it to > 'sbsa' until I sent out v1 patch. > > The work Arm TF and EDK2 porting to this platform needs this name to > be defined finally.
Why should EDK2 care what the QEMU machine type name is. The machine type name is purely a QEMU internal tag and shouldn't be visible in the guest ABI at all IIUC. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|