From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57238) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bkh9K-00082C-CU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:37:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bkh9F-0002IM-Is for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:37:02 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:43440) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bkh9F-0002IH-CT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 20:36:57 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 03:36:55 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20160916033402-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Virtual Machine Generation ID List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Ed Swierk Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Igor Mammedov , Laszlo Ersek On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 05:23:28PM -0700, Ed Swierk wrote: > I'm wondering what it will take to finish up work on vmgenid. > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-01/msg05599.html > > It appears all of the designs explored through the 19 iterations were > problematic in some way. Is any of them vaguely acceptable to all > involved in the discussions? Or do we need to start from square one? > > --Ed We have ACPI_BUILD_TPMLOG_FILE in tree now and I think it could be allocated in a similar way. Integrate patch "fw-cfg: support writeable blobs" to communicate the allocated address back to QEMU. -- MST