From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NKu9j-0006YW-NZ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:43:07 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NKu9f-0006Ty-1C
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:43:07 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=49212 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NKu9e-0006Ti-Q9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:43:02 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:29651)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <kraxel@redhat.com>) id 1NKu9e-0004VP-AO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:43:02 -0500
Message-ID: <4B28E3DB.2030106@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:42:51 +0100
From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Proper support for PCI-based option rom loading (was
	Re:	[Qemu-devel] Re: qdev property bug?)
References: <4B26A0DE.5000304@redhat.com> <20091214203428.GI6150@redhat.com>
	<20091214203603.GJ6150@redhat.com> <4B26A3B2.2030006@codemonkey.ws>
	<20091214205141.GC6398@redhat.com>
	<4B26F678.4010603@codemonkey.ws> <4B27541F.9020603@redhat.com>
	<4B276197.1080606@redhat.com> <4B27DF1A.3030000@codemonkey.ws>
	<4B28CC7A.7000100@redhat.com> <20091216123944.GA29289@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20091216123944.GA29289@redhat.com>
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: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: glommer@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, Kevin O'Connor <kevin@koconnor.net>, Sebastian Herbszt <herbszt@gmx.de>

   Hi,

> What will happen when we find a bug in one of ROMs
> I wonder? I think we will need to keep the old ROM
> around, and put it in as part of compat machine type?

What do you want?
Old way to load the rom?
Old rom binaries (i.e. etherboot)?
Both?

The new way to load the roms is a guest-visible change (devices get a 
rom bar they had not before), so we might want to have a backward 
compatibility property for that.  Not sure whenever this is a problem.

Allowing old ROMs isn't easy as they don't support BEV.

cheers,
   Gerd