From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KXrxy-0000Df-HQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:23:46 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KXrxx-0000Cn-FX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:23:46 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45502 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KXrxx-0000Cj-D0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:23:45 -0400 Received: from il.qumranet.com ([212.179.150.194]:36645) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KXrxw-00056b-TM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 02:23:45 -0400 Received: from gleb-debian.qumranet.com (gleb-debian.qumranet.com.qumranet.com [172.16.15.143]) by il.qumranet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A218E250310 for ; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:23:43 +0300 (IDT) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:23:43 +0300 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] Pass cpu speed into SM BIOS. Message-ID: <20080826062343.GS6192@minantech.com> References: <20080825142626.GP6192@minantech.com> <024101c906e8$9baaef60$0201a8c0@zeug> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <024101c906e8$9baaef60$0201a8c0@zeug> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 09:26:56PM +0200, Sebastian Herbszt wrote: > 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. 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. >> 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. -- Gleb.