qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 11/15] target-s390x: New QMP command query-cp


From: Eduardo Habkost
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 11/15] target-s390x: New QMP command query-cpu-model
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 15:28:26 -0300
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 01:21:05PM +0200, Michael Mueller wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 17:17:21 -0300
> Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 04:28:24PM +0200, Michael Mueller wrote:
> > > This patch implements a new QMP request named 'query-cpu-model'.
> > > It returns the cpu model of cpu 0 and its backing accelerator.
> > > 
> > > request:
> > >   {"execute" : "query-cpu-model" }
> > > 
> > > answer:
> > >   {"return" : {"name": "2827-ga2", "accel": "kvm" }}
> > 
> > If you are returning information about an existing CPU, why not just
> > extend the output of "query-cpus"?
> > 
> > (Existing qmp_query_cpus() calls cpu_synchronize_state(), which may be
> > undesired. But in this case we could add an optional parameter to
> > disable the return of data that requires stopping the VCPU).
> 
> Will the cpu_cpu_syncronize_state() really hurt in real life?
> query-cpus will be called only once a while...
> 

I was just thinking about possible reasons you wouldn't want to reuse
query-cpus, and thought cpu_synchronize_state() call could be one of
them.

> I will prepare the extension of query-cpus as an option but initially
> without the optional parameter.

I agree we can simply add the new info to query-cpus without any extra
parameter, and (if really necessary) we can worry about optimizing it by
avoiding the cpu_synchronize_state() call later.

-- 
Eduardo



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]