From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NAPR9-0007ST-Se
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:53:43 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NAPR4-0007LP-Fv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:53:42 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=51430 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NAPR3-0007L8-NW
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:53:37 -0500
Received: from mail-yw0-f176.google.com ([209.85.211.176]:36606)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1NAPR3-0001hp-CA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:53:37 -0500
Received: by ywh6 with SMTP id 6so55329ywh.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 06:53:36 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4B02B8ED.3070303@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 08:53:33 -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>	<200911171236.03478.paul@codesourcery.com>	<4B029E9D.3050003@redhat.com>	<200911171335.22727.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<4B02B1EA.5060000@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <4B02B1EA.5060000@suse.de>
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: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: Kevin O'Connor <kevin@koconnor.net>, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> Because that's not what you'd use it for. That's what -kernel and
> -initrd are there for.
>
> IMHO having a BIOS backdoor is a good thing in general. If anyone wants
> to destroy their user experience by writing a driver for that in their
> OS, I'm good with that, but let's not expose things twice _to users_ as
> the default case.
>   

N.B.  regardless of whether we have an alternative, simple block 
interface or we have proper drivers in the BIOS, we still have the same 
problem to solve.  We need a way to communicate the desired boot 
priority of each block device.  This becomes quite a bit more 
complicated if we're doing proper drivers in BIOS.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori
> Alex
>
>
>