From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46570) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z70yM-0002Pj-AE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 08:37:11 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z70yI-0005yn-Fg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 08:37:10 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([2001:1868:205::10]:43735) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z70yI-0005yW-9c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 08:37:06 -0400 Message-ID: <02bf769ef17461985acbeef8f6d9bd82.squirrel@www.zytor.com> In-Reply-To: <20150622140648-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> References: <1432686576-14816-1-git-send-email-pcacjr@zytor.com> <1434933423-10496-1-git-send-email-pcacjr@zytor.com> <20150622104151-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <5587D93B.2060307@redhat.com> <20150622140648-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:36:57 -0300 From: "Paulo Alcantara" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 1/3] ich9: add TCO interface emulation List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Paolo Bonzini , seabios@seabios.org, Paulo Alcantara , Paulo Alcantara , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, June 22, 2015 9:11 am, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 11:45:31AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> >> On 22/06/2015 10:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> > Given that support is known to be partial, would it make sense >> > to keep it disabled by default for 2.4? >> >> What is partial about it? > > Ow, looks like I didn't send out the response to the patch itself. > Will do. > >> In fact, considering that q35 behavior is >> still experimental it makes no sense to even make it conditional. > > I agree to this, though an option to disable seems useful for debugging, > so I'm glad that Paulo implemented it. It's probably not strictly > required to disable for old machine types, but why not. > >> We >> discussed this on IRC and I was hoping to hear you reply "sorry, I was >> wrong". Instead, I get this. >> >> Michael, I'm seriously getting annoyed by this behavior. Stop scaring >> away contributors. >> >> Paolo > > Doing my best here, but I do think we need to be careful about merging > things at this stage to avoid delaying the release. > >> > This way in 2.5 we won't need to add more flags to stay bug >> compatible. Hi Michael, I have seen no use other than watchdog functionality of TCO. The reason I wrote it was because I was working on an internal project that needed TCO to generate SMI so that my registered SW SMI handler in firmware would get executed. If, at that time, I had it supported on QEMU that would certainly have saved a lot of time instead testing it on bare hardware :-) Given that, I think it's OK for me to enable it by default on pc-q35-2.4 and later. Thanks, Paulo -- Paulo Alcantara, C.E.S.A.R Speaking for myself only.