Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] APIC/IOAPIC cleanup

[Avi Kivity]

 On 08/23/2010 01:18 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > I certainly don't, but others may.
> >
> > However, the problem remains: every time real hardware doesn't fit our pretty 
> > model we'll drop support for that hardware?
> No, every time real hardware doesn't fit out pretty model and nobody really 
> cares, we don't care.
>
> Seriously - would you want to start off modeling everything so that EISA and 
> MCA fit in too?

Look how this developed:

1. apic.c has an incestuous relationship with the cpu
2. let's make them one and the same
3. but in real life they're not one and the same in some cases
4. including some we support
5. let's drop support for those

vs

1. hardware isn't a tree
2. we have to live with that

Dropping support for 486 is fine, but let's not do it because we want to 
model hardware in a way that's different from reality

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function