From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NAATc-00078N-SZ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:55:16 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NAATX-00075Z-Kp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:55:16 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=54430 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NAATX-00075W-H7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:55:11 -0500
Received: from mail-qy0-f194.google.com ([209.85.221.194]:48111)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1NAATX-00069e-6Z
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:55:11 -0500
Received: by qyk32 with SMTP id 32so2620609qyk.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:55:10 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4B01D84C.80808@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:55:08 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] extboot reloaded.
References: <1258394678-8634-1-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com>
	<4B01A6E0.2060802@codemonkey.ws> <4B01B419.50905@redhat.com>
	<20091116223908.GD12063@shareable.org>
In-Reply-To: <20091116223908.GD12063@shareable.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>   
>> On 11/16/09 20:24, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>     
>>> If we were going to introduce a light weight block protocol like this,
>>> I'd rather it be implemented in SeaBIOS as a block driver.
>>>       
>> Ok.  That would mean to replace the option rom with a seabios patch. 
>> The qemu code will be unmodified though (except for the rom loading).
>>     
>
> Can't extboot be used with other BIOSes, though, being an option ROM?
>   

Except the "bus" that extboot requires doesn't exist anywhere but in qemu.

> -- Jamie
>   

Regards,

Anthony Liguori