From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Andrew D. Ball" <aball@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: approach for heavily hw-oriented values in smbios for
	guests
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:54:36 -0500
Message-ID: <1163692476.24087.28.camel@localhost>
Reply-To: aball@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

When I was implementing smbios, I occasionally put in mock values for
things like the data width of dimms, much to my chagrin.

What do y'all think the best approach to such situations would be?  If
specific migration groups were enforced, such that a guest will not be
migrated to a different type of cpu/memory/etc., putting accuracte data
there makes sense to me.  Otherwise, I'd prefer to put no values.
However, even though the SMBIOS 2.4 standard specifies lots of places
where a value of 'unknown' is syntactically valid, the comformance
guidelines require a ton of very hardware oriented things to be fully
specified.

Thanks for your help!
Andrew