From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KYUgI-00046b-L3
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:44:06 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KYUgG-00046H-P2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:44:06 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33902 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KYUgG-00046E-IV
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:44:04 -0400
Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:57460)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <herbszt@gmx.de>) id 1KYUgF-0000oJ-Tj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:44:04 -0400
Message-ID: <065001c9089e$c73dc960$0201a8c0@zeug>
From: "Sebastian Herbszt" <herbszt@gmx.de>
References: <20080825142626.GP6192@minantech.com><024101c906e8$9baaef60$0201a8c0@zeug>
	<20080826062343.GS6192@minantech.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 01:42:59 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] Pass cpu speed into SM BIOS.
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
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.gnu.org/pipermail/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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>>> This is the incorrect frequency for a QEMU guest.  I'm not sure why 
>>>> this  is included.  What does passing the frequency give us?
>>>>
>>> This is included for two reasons. First one is to demonstrate that
>>> proposed interface is extensible. Second is that Micrisoft SVVP test  
>>> requires this info (and much more) to be set in SMBIOS tables.
>>
>> Can you elaborate a bit on the "and much more" part? Is this the stuff
>> described in "SMBIOS "Designed for Windows" Logo Requirements" at
>> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/firmware/SMBIOS.mspx ?
>>
> I think yes. There is Microsoft test suit that test SMBIOS
> implementation. Running it on bochs bios results in a couple of errors.

Could you maybe post those errors on the bochs mailing list?

> Some fields cannot be empty. Some bits should be set. Most things can be
> fixed without qemu help, but for CPU speed we need to ask qemu.

What about computing the frequency in rombios?

>>> Using real HW value seams to be better than just provide some default one.
>>
>> What downside does using a default value have? On the upside this patch would
>> not be needed.
>>
>>
> What value do you propose? Without knowing how Windows uses it we can't
> say what are the downsides.

- Sebastian