|Subject:||Re: [Qemu-riscv] [Qemu-devel] RISC-V: Vector && DSP Extension|
|Date:||Thu, 15 Aug 2019 12:32:57 +0200|
15.08.2019. 11.07, "Peter Maydell" <address@hidden> је написао/ла:
> 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
Thanks for detailed response.
> -- PMM
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|