"刘志伟" <[email protected]> writes:
> These topics are interesting. I have two questions. > > 1. Can we join it on online? If so, could you share the meeting link > before the meeting. I will try to find out. > > 2. If it is only offline, could you share the meeting content to the > public? I'll certainly try and write up some minutes for the list. > > Thanks, > Zhiwei > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > 发件人：Alex Bennée <[email protected]> > 发送时间：2022年9月1日(星期四) 01:08 > 收件人：[email protected] <[email protected]> > 抄 送：Mark Burton <[email protected]>; Edgar E. Iglesias > <[email protected]>; Richard > Henderson <[email protected]>; Paolo Bonzini > <[email protected]>; Peter Maydell > <[email protected]>; Song Gao <[email protected]>; Xiaojuan Yang > <[email protected]>; > "Cédric Le Goater" <[email protected]>; Palmer Dabbelt <[email protected]>; > Alistair Francis > <[email protected]>; Bin Meng <[email protected]>; David Gibson > <[email protected]>; > Markus Armbruster <[email protected]>; Michael Roth <[email protected]>; > Luc Michel <[email protected]>; > Damien Hedde <[email protected]>; Alessandro Di Federico > <[email protected]> > 主 题：Re: Any interest in a QEMU emulation BoF at KVM Forum? > > Alex Bennée <[email protected]> writes: > > qemu-devel keeps bouncing the message so replying with a cut down CC list. > > > Hi, > > > > Given our slowly growing range of TCG emulations and the evident > > interest in keeping up with modern processor architectures is it worth > > having an emulation focused BoF at the up-coming KVM Forum? > > > > Some potential topics for discussion I could think of might include: > > > > * Progress towards heterogeneous vCPU emulation > > > > We've been making slow progress in removing assumptions from the > > various front-ends about their global nature and adding accel:TCG > > abstractions and support for the translator loop. We can already have > > CPUs from the same architecture family in a model. What else do we need > > to do so we can have those funky ARM+RiscV+Tricore heterogeneous > > models? Is it library or something else? > > > > * External Device Models > > > > I know this is a contentious topic given the potential for GPL > > end-runs. However there are also good arguments for enabling the > > testing of open source designs without having forcing the > > implementation of a separate C model to test software. For example if > > we hypothetically modelled a Pi Pico would it make sense to model the > > PIO in C if we could just compile the Verilog for it into a SystemC > > model? Would a plethora of closed device models be the inevitable > > consequence of such an approach? Would it matter if we just > > concentrated on supporting useful open source solutions? > > > > * Dynamic Machine Models > > > > While we try and avoid modelling bespoke virtual HW in QEMU > > (virt/goldfish not withstanding ;-) there is obviously a desire in the > > EDA space to allow such experimentation. Is this something we can > > provide so aspiring HW engineers can experiment with system > > architectures without having to form QEMU and learn QOM. There have > > been suggestions about consuming device trees or maybe translating to > > QMP calls and adding support for wiring devices together. Given the > > number of forks that exist is this something that could be better > > supported upstream without degenerating into messy hacks? > > > > * A sense of time > > > > Currently we have the fairly limited support for -icount in QEMU. At > > the same time we have no desire to start expanding frontends with > > the details cost models required for a more realistic sense of time to > > be presented. One suggestion is to expand the TCG plugin interface to > > allow for the plugin to control time allowing as much or little logic > > to be pushed there as we like and freeing up frontends from ever having > > to consider it. > > > > Are any of these topics of interest? Are there any other emulation > > topics people would like to discuss? > > -- > Alex Bennée -- Alex Bennée
