From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KXXWd-0008Sa-Bc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 04:34:11 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KXXWb-0008S8-Qy for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 04:34:10 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60065 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KXXWb-0008S5-Ml for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 04:34:09 -0400 Received: from relay01.mx.bawue.net ([193.7.176.67]:33256) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KXXWb-00064S-AE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 04:34:09 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:34:00 +0200 From: Thiemo Seufer Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Make vmport an optional feature at run time. Message-ID: <20080825083400.GA994@networkno.de> References: <1219578445-25610-1-git-send-email-blob@blob.co.uk> <48B1B8C5.4040902@codemonkey.ws> <48B1FB9F.3090405@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48B1FB9F.3090405@codemonkey.ws> 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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Ian Kirk Anthony Liguori wrote: > Ian Kirk wrote: >> Anthony Liguori wrote: >> >> >>> Ian Kirk wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> This is my first time sending a patch, so apologies for any errors. >>>> >>>> Patch makes vmport optionally initiated. >>>> >>>> >>> Why should it be optional? >>> >> >> I believe that VMware ESXi (and perhaps other hypervisors/emulators/etc) >> doesn't work when it thinks it is running within virtual enviroment, as it >> talks to vmport when booting (and fails in the current implemtnation - >> perhaps it only works under itself?) >> > > That's most likely because the vmport emulation isn't complete enough. > >> If I comment init_vmport() out, it definately progresses further along the >> boot sequence. >> >> Also, I guess, it gives you the option to better emulate a real PC (which >> I assume doesn't have vmport). >> > > I don't think that's very valuable in and of itself. Moreover, there > are probably a lot more issues with respect to getting ESXi to run under > QEMU. Adding another command line option to support something that we > don't know will ever work worries me. It's just another knob for > someone to accidentally tweak. At this point I wonder if we should have both a "real PC" machine and a "virtual x86" machine. We have already seen patches for a xen-specific variant of the latter. Thiemo