From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by 2002:ac2:4c03:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id t3csp9803203lfq; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:13:03 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzYt8pVt+PMaXASnSkIDpY4eJQYhQMhIAJ8lYT0zcaxAwvJzRueICZQX5ePRIbmgrjTY/jh X-Received: by 2002:a25:2317:: with SMTP id j23mr4010455ybj.388.1609110783774; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:13:03 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1609110783; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=ptUK1u0YyY1zfNgXxjU9j6GWKxXxqMAmUJuhs+SfHEK3Hja1sHAdd+zoQ7qGXylyc3 kcFxbmryif/S6wweYrQNxo4tP93r90lEc6gvMp9yA85atF1f3z5JOoNmOA7Gb1VKjMjS z5L/T20s4CPmMUn3ti5SJtW5LhZOGgkpFpWxpS8Dei1Y83S4U5U7c7lHBTXiWPSh7bLK W89ucMz7RwnBK1wosfjwZltxJlI0ESypOefhZvnpc/OgM56vaq+uI+vzJ3BRdQaadigA PQmBqvMGWP8ZEBv5mxuU4DjZt6rz47D9Ylf6ZcUbvqPjyA1VBxo+g054l3gy24ijF1rD vtZA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=sender:errors-to:cc:list-subscribe:list-help:list-post:list-archive :list-unsubscribe:list-id:precedence:mime-version:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:to:from:dkim-signature; bh=x0tlcnEaIzgDNJFigEv9f9l4gjl1U2/aS1sW7SzoplM=; b=iXXbvXL9K0w9pxXSWuRhsR8ub5V+NMi5fHi+gsA9L5DH2jl14JqWjPXCXfchou7R4A ZQxeBxdaDNc25GTvc+Na8YRAE/3D1j/OdUVGStCxDcVHFNiSvyE70iDFylQku3iFZp3A bAiUNLVxNCdt27Sy/DrhEqmwDNQ5U/7Q+O3a1yiIivWndNX/rs8vrXWrNrM2MU12Ifqn S1diOF8F9qzhpzey1vpMV7H/Cy3ARNoG1BX/L6Jl7bYljo3DuuRPuc+vj7k6Qvc9pOga k7qrzNDt/x4O9cdAFCo6MFCqDGAOb806esPOIDUQXXo6VShFPJ/uEJqpymxhtDuJqXFq Q96w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@mutex.one header.s=default header.b=B2gMQXZp; spf=pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org" Return-Path: Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org. [209.51.188.17]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i136si9161324yba.368.2020.12.27.15.13.03 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:13:03 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.51.188.17; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@mutex.one header.s=default header.b=B2gMQXZp; spf=pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org" Received: from localhost ([::1]:37180 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ktfDj-00066Q-7P for alex.bennee@linaro.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:13:03 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43198) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ktfDX-00066B-EY; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:12:51 -0500 Received: from mail.mutex.one ([62.77.152.124]:35832) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ktfDV-00074Q-Px; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:12:51 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.mutex.one (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4577CBF426F7; Mon, 28 Dec 2020 01:12:45 +0200 (EET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.mutex.one Received: from mail.mutex.one ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.mutex.one [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5lUszS5YsjFg; Mon, 28 Dec 2020 01:12:44 +0200 (EET) Received: [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])nknown [109.103.89.101]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.mutex.one (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 580F9BF426BC; Mon, 28 Dec 2020 01:12:44 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mutex.one; s=default; t=1609110764; bh=xS/FIkdJMUsq++QyeLG4EutDW3emZ/ZZcdspCegkC5M=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=B2gMQXZpuHAWmgeYVTeBlV3KvhmHi3E09VoFGO0zMnXdyeGXujvrIKwDTrDroiGOZ H8iztdTKIiBBWZUOMjvpkXI/fMNsGxUjAvrxiOVJJqxeI+ChLbYSTzvdIdY+o2T58X UuOqg8NADFsStj2WtTEi/wUD/q1LCZiVxBYxgN5I= From: Marian Posteuca To: Paolo Bonzini , Michael Tokarev , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] acpi: Permit OEM ID and OEM table ID fields to be changed In-Reply-To: <93c58d9d-63c6-b2d8-2b12-d7ed4aa1b171@redhat.com> References: <20201222113353.31224-1-posteuca@mutex.one> <87eejh4zpq.fsf@mutex.one> <93c58d9d-63c6-b2d8-2b12-d7ed4aa1b171@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 01:12:40 +0200 Message-ID: <87tus64zdj.fsf@mutex.one> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=62.77.152.124; envelope-from=posteuca@mutex.one; helo=mail.mutex.one X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-arm@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Peter Maydell , Eduardo Habkost , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Richard Henderson , Dongjiu Geng , Shannon Zhao , qemu-arm@nongnu.org, Igor Mammedov , Xiao Guangrong Errors-To: qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-arm" X-TUID: KHPYg2Li0BCm Paolo Bonzini writes: > On 22/12/20 16:39, Marian Posteuca wrote: >>>> Qemu's ACPI table generation sets the fields OEM ID and OEM table ID >>>> to "BOCHS " and "BXPCxxxx" where "xxxx" is replaced by the ACPI >>>> table name. >>>> >>>> Some games like Red Dead Redemption 2 seem to check the ACPI OEM ID >>>> and OEM table ID for the strings "BOCHS" and "BXPC" and if they are >>>> found, the game crashes(this may be an intentional detection >>>> mechanism to prevent playing the game in a virtualized environment). >>> This isn't a technical question/comment about the patch itself, but >>> about something different. Do we really want to play this whack-a-mole >>> game? If we change ACPI table IDs, those who want to disallow running >>> their software inside qemu/kvm will find some other way to check for >>> this environment. We will change that, - just to be found again. And >>> so on.. is it productive? I don't think so. >> >> My personal opinion is that as long as it's not too difficult to mask >> that the guest is running in a virtualized environment we should try to >> do these changes. But I guess this can only be judged on per change basis. > > I don't have any particular opinion against the "arms > race"/"whack-a-mole" situation. We played the game (and sort of won, > they got tired of changing the drivers) against NVIDIA already. > > For 6.0 I'm already planning to revamp a bunch of machine properties, > for example making -acpitable file=xxx a synonym for "-machine > acpi.tables.N.file=xxx". Perhaps we could plan for that and make the > option "-machine acpi.oem_id". This looks like a great idea. Noob question here, should I change my patch in any way for this to happen? > > Paolo