From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: KVM call agenda for 2013-06-11 Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:38:11 -0500 Message-ID: <878v2gqyr0.fsf@codemonkey.ws> References: <20130604132431.GA24301@redhat.com> <20130611154551.GA2756@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: KVM devel mailing list , lersek@redhat.com, seabios@seabios.org, qemu-devel , Kevin O'Connor , ddutile@redhat.com, dwmw2@infradead.org To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Juan Quintela Return-path: Received: from mail-oa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.219.45]:58659 "EHLO mail-oa0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753181Ab3FKSiO (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:38:14 -0400 Received: by mail-oa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id j1so1142627oag.32 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2013 11:38:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130611154551.GA2756@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 04:24:31PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> Juan is not available now, and Anthony asked for >> agenda to be sent early. >> So here comes: >> >> Agenda for the meeting Tue, June 11: >> >> - Generating acpi tables, redux > > Not so much notes as a quick summary of the call: > > There are the following reasons to generate ACPI tables in QEMU: > > - sharing code with e.g. ovmf > Anthony thinks this is not a valid argument > > - so we can make tables more dynamic and move away from iasl > Anthony thinks this is not a valid reason too, > since qemu and seabios have access to same info > MST noted several info not accessible to bios. > Anthony said they can be added, e.g. by exposing > QOM to the bios. > > - even though most tables are static, hardcoded > they are likely to change over time > Anthony sees this as justified > > To summarize, there's a concensus now that generating ACPI > tables in QEMU is a good idea. I would say best worst idea ;-) I am deeply concerned about the complexity it introduces but I don't see many other options. > > Two issues that need to be addressed: > - original patches break cross-version migration. Need to fix that. > > - Anthony requested that patchset is merged together with > some new feature. I'm not sure the reasoning is clear: > current a version intentionally generates tables > that are bug for bug compatible with seabios, > to simplify testing. I expect that there will be additional issues that need to be worked out and want to see a feature that actually uses the infrastructure before we add it. > It seems clear we have users for this such as > hotplug of devices behind pci bridges, so > why keep the infrastructure out of tree? It's hard to evaluate the infrastructure without a user. > Looking for something additional, smaller as the hotplug patch > is a bit big, so might delay merging. > > > Going forward - would we want to move > smbios as well? Everyone seems to think it's a > good idea. Yes, independent of ACPI, I think QEMU should be generating the SMBIOS tables. Regards, Anthony Liguori > -- > MST