Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/7] smbios cleanup & nicer defaults for type 1

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 01:42:28PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> [Note cc: Andreas]
> 
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 03:18:27PM +0200, armbru@redhat.com wrote:
> >> From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
> >> 
> >> This gets rid of one of the last get_param_value() users, makes
> >> multiple -smbios work sanely, cleans up the gross side effect in
> >> qemu_uuid_parse(), and more.  Topped off with a little feature in the
> >> last patch.
> >> 
> >> v2: Rebase, only last patch had conflicts
> >
> > OK my thinking at this point is:
> > patches 1-6 are ready
> > Any objections?
> > patch 7 - I would prefer some way to explicitly set
> > default smbios manufacturer/version in machine type
> > and set these from machine type, instead of
> > the smbios_type1_defaults boolean.
> 
> Are you asking for a new QEMUMachine member holding manufacturer (either
> "Bochs", "QEMU" or null), and new members holding product and version
> (either null or same value as existing members desc and version, at
> least now)?

Yes, I think we can live with this one.
Though I would really prefer a property of some device.

> Or just for moving smbios_type1_defaults from init function
> into QEMUMachine?
> 
> > Would you like
> > - me to apply 1-6 and keep working on 7?
> > - wait for you to repost v3?
> > - look for another maintainer to take patchset as is (if someone
> > cares to, I won't object)?
> 
> Waiting for another maintainer after waiting >2 months for *any*
> maintainer doesn't strike me as a good idea %-}
> 
> I'm totally fine with you taking just PATCH 1-5.  PATCH 6, however,
> should not be applied without PATCH 7.  Andreas doesn't like PATCH 6,
> and overruling his dislike without an actual use for it (which comes
> only in PATCH 7) isn't nice.

I missed this fact, thanks for pointing it out.
So please arrive at consensus with Andreas re PATCH 6.