From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59752) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V6daF-0003x6-D1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Aug 2013 05:29:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V6da9-0003Gv-DF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Aug 2013 05:29:39 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:29628) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V6da9-0003Gn-4Q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Aug 2013 05:29:33 -0400 Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2013 12:29:27 +0300 From: Gleb Natapov Message-ID: <20130806092927.GA12514@redhat.com> References: <51FF6A79.9060603@redhat.com> <703333176.9515483.1375697447963.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> <20130805151723.GF877@redhat.com> <1970367422.9695773.1375718517492.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> <20130805161833.GA4244@redhat.com> <51FFD6CE.5090302@redhat.com> <20130805182628.GC4244@redhat.com> <20130806072152.GK10891@redhat.com> <20130806083309.GA11051@redhat.com> <20130806092646.GC6433@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130806092646.GC6433@localhost.localdomain> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [SeaBIOS] [PATCH] don't expose pvpanic device in the UI List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Hu Tao Cc: Marcel Apfelbaum , seabios@seabios.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Gerd Hoffmann , Paolo Bonzini , Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rber?= On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 05:26:46PM +0800, Hu Tao wrote: > On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 11:33:10AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 10:21:52AM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > > > If you see a mouse in a room, how likely is it that there's > > > > a single mouse there? > > > > > > > > This is a PV technology which to me looks like it was > > > > rushed through and not only set on by default, but > > > > without a way to disable it - apparently on the assumption > > > > there's 0 chance it can cause any damage. Now that > > > > we do know the chance it's not there, why not go back > > > > to the standard interface, and why not give > > > > users a chance to enable/disable it? > > > You should be able to disable it with: -device pvpanic,ioport=0 > > > > Doesn't work for me. > > The internal pvpanic can be disabled by -global pvpanic.ioport=0. > -device pvpanic,ioport=0 just adds another pvpanic device. Yeah, good point. -- Gleb.