[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-riscv] [Qemu-devel] RISC-V: Vector && DSP Extension

From: Peter Maydell
Subject: Re: [Qemu-riscv] [Qemu-devel] RISC-V: Vector && DSP Extension
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 10:07:45 +0100

On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 at 09:53, Aleksandar Markovic
<address@hidden> wrote:
> > We can accept draft
> > extensions in QEMU as long as they are disabled by default.

> Hi, Alistair, Palmer,
> Is this an official stance of QEMU community, or perhaps Alistair's
> personal judgement, or maybe a rule within risv subcomunity?

Alistair asked on a previous thread; my view was:
and nobody else spoke up disagreeing (summary: should at least be
disabled-by-default and only enabled by setting an explicit
property whose name should start with the 'x-' prefix).

In general QEMU does sometimes introduce experimental extensions
(we've had them in the block layer, for example) and so the 'x-'
property to enable them is a reasonably established convention.
I think it's a reasonable compromise to allow this sort of work
to start and not have to live out-of-tree for a long time, without
confusing users or getting into a situation where some QEMU
versions behave differently or to obsolete drafts of a spec
without it being clear from the command line that experimental
extensions are being enabled.

There is also an element of "submaintainer judgement" to be applied
here -- upstream is probably not the place for a draft extension
to be implemented if it is:
 * still fast moving or subject to major changes of design direction
 * major changes to the codebase (especially if it requires
   changes to core code) that might later need to be redone
   entirely differently
 * still experimental

-- PMM

reply via email to

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