From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=56646 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P5P1B-0008VU-QU
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 16:31:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1P5P0x-0008RH-J5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 16:30:45 -0400
Received: from mail-iw0-f173.google.com ([209.85.214.173]:59090)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1P5P0x-0008RD-Fb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 16:30:31 -0400
Received: by iwn34 with SMTP id 34so2581325iwn.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 13:30:30 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4CB373DD.50307@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 15:30:21 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [SeaBIOS] [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Passing boot order from qemu to
	seabios
References: <20101011101855.GA25030@redhat.com> <4CB2E7D0.1010702@redhat.com>
	<4CB2FDF2.1020705@redhat.com> <20101011121634.GB28008@redhat.com>
	<4CB36A20.5020106@codemonkey.ws> <20101011195955.GA5218@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20101011195955.GA5218@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, seabios@seabios.org, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 10/11/2010 02:59 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> No boot rom should do that. extboot wreaks havoc when it is used.
> And since virtio is now supported by bios there is no reason to use it.
>    

You don't really have a choice.  You could be doing hardware passthrough 
and the ROM on the card may hijack int19.

> Whoever needs scsi boot should add it to seabios too.
>    

I don't disagree.

I think the best thing to do is to let SeaBIOS create a boot order table 
that contains descriptive information and then advertise that to QEMU.

QEMU can then try to associate the list of bootable devices with it's 
own set of devices and select a preferred order that it can then give 
back to SeaBIOS.  SeaBIOS can then present that list to the user for 
additional refinement.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> --
> 			Gleb.
>