Patchwork [qom-cpu,for-1.4] target-arm: Rename CPU types

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Andreas Färber
Date Jan. 27, 2013, 4:30 p.m.
Message ID <1359304210-5073-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/216018/
State New
Headers show

Comments

Andreas Färber - Jan. 27, 2013, 4:30 p.m.
In the initial conversion of CPU models to QOM types, model names were
mapped 1:1 to type names. As a side effect this gained us a type "any",
which is now a device.

To avoid "-device any" silliness and to pave the way for compiling
multiple targets into one executable, adopt a <name>-<arch>-cpu scheme.
This leads to names like arm926-arm-cpu but is easiest to handle.

No functional changes for -cpu arguments or -cpu ? output.

Suggested-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de>
---
 target-arm/cpu.c    |    8 ++++++--
 target-arm/helper.c |   11 ++++++++---
 2 Dateien geändert, 14 Zeilen hinzugefügt(+), 5 Zeilen entfernt(-)
Peter Maydell - Jan. 29, 2013, 11:03 a.m.
On 27 January 2013 16:30, Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de> wrote:
> In the initial conversion of CPU models to QOM types, model names were
> mapped 1:1 to type names. As a side effect this gained us a type "any",
> which is now a device.
>
> To avoid "-device any" silliness and to pave the way for compiling
> multiple targets into one executable, adopt a <name>-<arch>-cpu scheme.
> This leads to names like arm926-arm-cpu but is easiest to handle.
>
> No functional changes for -cpu arguments or -cpu ? output.
>
> Suggested-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de>

Acked-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>

I assume you're going to submit this via the qom subtree.

-- PMM
Andreas Färber - Jan. 29, 2013, noon
Am 29.01.2013 12:03, schrieb Peter Maydell:
> On 27 January 2013 16:30, Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de> wrote:
>> In the initial conversion of CPU models to QOM types, model names were
>> mapped 1:1 to type names. As a side effect this gained us a type "any",
>> which is now a device.
>>
>> To avoid "-device any" silliness and to pave the way for compiling
>> multiple targets into one executable, adopt a <name>-<arch>-cpu scheme.
>> This leads to names like arm926-arm-cpu but is easiest to handle.
>>
>> No functional changes for -cpu arguments or -cpu ? output.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de>
> 
> Acked-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>

I just re-reviewed this: env->cpu_model_str is set in cpu_arm_init(), so
this patch is good to go (unlike unicore32).

> I assume you're going to submit this via the qom subtree.

It applies to master now and is an arm-internal leaf patch. Since you
have another target-arm.next patch that Blue didn't pick up so far, feel
free to send a pull for both. But I'm fine taking it through my tree if
you prefer.

Thanks,
Andreas
Peter Maydell - Jan. 30, 2013, 4:17 p.m.
On 29 January 2013 12:00, Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de> wrote:
> Am 29.01.2013 12:03, schrieb Peter Maydell:
>> I assume you're going to submit this via the qom subtree.
>
> It applies to master now and is an arm-internal leaf patch. Since you
> have another target-arm.next patch that Blue didn't pick up so far, feel
> free to send a pull for both. But I'm fine taking it through my tree if
> you prefer.

OK, I put it in my target-arm pullreq.

-- PMM

Patch

diff --git a/target-arm/cpu.c b/target-arm/cpu.c
index d1a4c82..1c6a628 100644
--- a/target-arm/cpu.c
+++ b/target-arm/cpu.c
@@ -204,12 +204,15 @@  void arm_cpu_realize(ARMCPU *cpu)
 static ObjectClass *arm_cpu_class_by_name(const char *cpu_model)
 {
     ObjectClass *oc;
+    char *typename;
 
     if (!cpu_model) {
         return NULL;
     }
 
-    oc = object_class_by_name(cpu_model);
+    typename = g_strdup_printf("%s-" TYPE_ARM_CPU, cpu_model);
+    oc = object_class_by_name(typename);
+    g_free(typename);
     if (!oc || !object_class_dynamic_cast(oc, TYPE_ARM_CPU) ||
         object_class_is_abstract(oc)) {
         return NULL;
@@ -789,14 +792,15 @@  static void arm_cpu_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data)
 static void cpu_register(const ARMCPUInfo *info)
 {
     TypeInfo type_info = {
-        .name = info->name,
         .parent = TYPE_ARM_CPU,
         .instance_size = sizeof(ARMCPU),
         .instance_init = info->initfn,
         .class_size = sizeof(ARMCPUClass),
     };
 
+    type_info.name = g_strdup_printf("%s-" TYPE_ARM_CPU, info->name);
     type_register(&type_info);
+    g_free((void *)type_info.name);
 }
 
 static const TypeInfo arm_cpu_type_info = {
diff --git a/target-arm/helper.c b/target-arm/helper.c
index 7a10fdd..eb7b291 100644
--- a/target-arm/helper.c
+++ b/target-arm/helper.c
@@ -1303,9 +1303,9 @@  static gint arm_cpu_list_compare(gconstpointer a, gconstpointer b)
 
     name_a = object_class_get_name(class_a);
     name_b = object_class_get_name(class_b);
-    if (strcmp(name_a, "any") == 0) {
+    if (strcmp(name_a, "any-" TYPE_ARM_CPU) == 0) {
         return 1;
-    } else if (strcmp(name_b, "any") == 0) {
+    } else if (strcmp(name_b, "any-" TYPE_ARM_CPU) == 0) {
         return -1;
     } else {
         return strcmp(name_a, name_b);
@@ -1316,9 +1316,14 @@  static void arm_cpu_list_entry(gpointer data, gpointer user_data)
 {
     ObjectClass *oc = data;
     CPUListState *s = user_data;
+    const char *typename;
+    char *name;
 
+    typename = object_class_get_name(oc);
+    name = g_strndup(typename, strlen(typename) - strlen("-" TYPE_ARM_CPU));
     (*s->cpu_fprintf)(s->file, "  %s\n",
-                      object_class_get_name(oc));
+                      name);
+    g_free(name);
 }
 
 void arm_cpu_list(FILE *f, fprintf_function cpu_fprintf)