On 25 July 2018 at 11:17, Hongbo Zhang <hongbo.zh...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 25 July 2018 at 17:13, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> wrote: >> On 25 July 2018 at 11:09, Hongbo Zhang <hongbo.zh...@linaro.org> wrote: >>> On 25 July 2018 at 17:01, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> wrote: >>>> On 25 July 2018 at 10:48, 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". >>>>> >>>> >>>> I couldn't agree more. However, IIUC this change was made at the >>>> request of one of the reviewers, although I wasn't part of the >>>> discussion at that point, so I'm not sure who it was. >>>> >>>> Hongbo, could you please share a link to that discussion? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Ard. >>>> >>> >>> V1 discussion here: >>> https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@nongnu.org/msg545775.html >>> >> >> So who asked for the sbsa -> enterprise change? > > Actually nobody, but it was argued that sbsa does not require ehci and > ahci etc, then we should find a name fitting for this platform better.
That doesn't make sense to me. The SBSA describes a minimal configuration, it does not limit what peripherals may be attached to the core system.
