Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] docs: add a table showing x86-64 ABI compatibility levels

[Eduardo Habkost]

On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 03:36:03PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> It is useful to know which CPUs satisfy each x86-64 ABI
> compatibility level, when dealing with guest OS that require
> something newer than the baseline ABI.
> 
> These ABI levels are defined in:
> 
>   https://gitlab.com/x86-psABIs/x86-64-ABI/
> 
> and supported by GCC, CLang, GLibC and more.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
[...]
> diff --git a/docs/system/cpu-models-x86-abi.csv 
> b/docs/system/cpu-models-x86-abi.csv
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..4565e6a535
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/docs/system/cpu-models-x86-abi.csv
> @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
> +Model,baseline,v2,v3,v4
> +486,,,,
> +486-v1,,,,
> +Broadwell,✅,✅,✅,
> +Broadwell-IBRS,✅,✅,✅,
> +Broadwell-noTSX,✅,✅,✅,
> +Broadwell-noTSX-IBRS,✅,✅,✅,
> +Broadwell-v1,✅,✅,✅,
> +Broadwell-v2,✅,✅,✅,
> +Broadwell-v3,✅,✅,✅,
> +Broadwell-v4,✅,✅,✅,

Unversioned names like "Broadwell" are machine-type-dependent
aliases.  I don't think they should be present in the table.

Models with suffixes like -IBRS, -noTSX, etc. are also aliases to
specific versions.  Maybe they could appear in the table for
completeness, but I'm not sure.

-- 
Eduardo