From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KNvDh-0007tV-Ua for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:50:53 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KNvDg-0007t0-Dl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:50:53 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59340 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KNvDg-0007sw-BP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:50:52 -0400 Received: from il.qumranet.com ([212.179.150.194]:22844) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KNvDg-0006Og-0I for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:50:52 -0400 Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 22:50:48 +0300 From: Gleb Natapov Message-ID: <20080729195048.GC11061@minantech.com> References: <488DC8B2.1070009@redhat.com> <20080728141515.GJ3196@minantech.com> <488DD98D.5010907@codemonkey.ws> <20080728153527.GA23771@minantech.com> <488F6E0E.2070504@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <488F6E0E.2070504@codemonkey.ws> Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/3]: Add UUID command-line option Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: Chris Lalancette , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 02:22:54PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Gleb Natapov wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 09:37:01AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> >>> The backdoor interface is deprecated (from a VMware perspective) and >>> is pretty terrible. I'll go through and do a more thorough review >>> of the patches Chris posted but one thing I already know I'd like to >>> see the >> Review my last submission I linked above then too. >> > > Applying the -uuid support without making use of that uuid anywhere > isn't very useful. > You can read it from monitor, so management software can benefit from it. And this will reduce my patch backlog :) >>> UUID plumbed through the SMBIOS tables for x86. That's a requirement >>> in my mind for adding a -uuid option. I see no harm in also >>> supporting the backdoor interface but the primary way to expose a >>> UUID should be SMBIOS. >>> >> I am not sure I understand what you mean. Currently SMBIOS tables are >> built by bochs bios and UUID backdoor is needed to fill in missing info. >> > > But that patch that got pushed into the Bochs BIOS was wrong. > > So here's what I'd like to see in order to apply these patches: > > 1) A new patch to the Bochs BIOS that used CMOS to pass a UUID (or > possibly an OF data structure as Blue Swirl suggested--although CMOS is > safer). We will run out of space in CMOS quickly if we will use it as qemu->bios communication channel. Is passing pointer to memory location (Blue Swirl suggestion) acceptable solution by everyone? -- Gleb.