From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40814) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr6j5-0002pt-Sc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 09:59:30 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr6iz-0002FH-OW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 09:59:23 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45397) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr6iz-0002F8-Ga for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 09:59:17 -0500 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id sAJExGV9001136 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 09:59:16 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 14:59:12 +0000 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Message-ID: <20141119145911.GG2355@work-vm> References: <87d28jo5yp.fsf@elfo.elfo> <20141119102136.GC26395@redhat.com> <878uj7o4ec.fsf@elfo.elfo> <20141119132851.GA27435@redhat.com> <546C9EC0.5000105@redhat.com> <87ioibmgx6.fsf@elfo.elfo> <20141119141301.GC2355@work-vm> <546CA78F.2030801@redhat.com> <20141119142617.GE2355@work-vm> <546CA905.1050809@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <546CA905.1050809@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/5] exec: qemu_ram_alloc_device, qemu_ram_resize List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Juan Quintela * Paolo Bonzini (pbonzini@redhat.com) wrote: > > > On 19/11/2014 15:26, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > * Paolo Bonzini (pbonzini@redhat.com) wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 19/11/2014 15:13, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > >>> Since we've wondered off the actual ACPI table stuff into general > >>> ROM sizing, I'd like to propose some concrete fixes: > >>> > >>> 1) We explicitly name the bios file in a .romfile attribute for > >>> all ROMs. > >>> 2) The code that uses .romfile has an expansion for $MACHINETYPE > >>> 3) We actually symlink all of those together, anyone who wants/has > >>> to deal with different versions can downstream. > >>> 4) The machine types contain size attributes for the ROMs that > >>> are generoously larger than the ROMs anyone currently uses. > >>> > >>> I think 1..3 should deal with those of us who have to deal with different > >>> ROM versions on different machine types. > >> > >> It should, but it's a solution in search of a problem. > > > > Well we already do something close to 1 & 2 downstream but more ad-hoc; > > it's just a generalisation (and 4 from padding the size of our images). > > So we already had that problem. > > Upstream too. See pxe-* vs. efi-* NIC option ROMs. The latter includes > both PXE firmware for BIOS and EFI drivers. We keep two copies because > they have different sizes. Having explicit expansions for $MACHINETYPE > would be hugely overkill, in my opinion. Yes it is, but it's simple and feels easy to understand. Dave > > Paolo > > >> > >>> 4 might be good enough for the ACPI tables if you can bound it. > >> > >> Already doing that (rounding to 128k, warning if >64k), but it is not a > >> definitive solution. > >> > >> We also do (4) for ROMs, since VGA BIOSes use only 36k out of 64k and > >> iPXE ROMs use only ~200k out of 256k. > >> > >> Paolo > > -- > > Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK > > -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK