From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NLgPn-0004Mt-Fk
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:14:55 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NLgPj-0004Jn-0E
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:14:55 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=53344 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NLgPi-0004Jg-Hm
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:14:50 -0500
Received: from mail-yx0-f188.google.com ([209.85.210.188]:65088)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1NLgPi-0000bU-BP
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:14:50 -0500
Received: by yxe26 with SMTP id 26so3195127yxe.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:14:49 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4B2BB886.10707@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:14:46 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1261134074-11795-1-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com>
	<4B2B9340.1020001@codemonkey.ws> <4B2BAF25.2070800@redhat.com>
	<4B2BB0E8.7060907@codemonkey.ws> <4B2BB5E0.9010701@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B2BB5E0.9010701@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [SeaBIOS] [PATCH 0/8] option rom loading overhaul.
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: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>>> Is 0.11 -> 0.12 migration supposed to work? That could become quite
>>> nasty too. But maybe that is impossible anyway due to the switch to
>>> seabios?
>>
>> In theory, it should work. SeaBIOS should not be a guest visible change
>> because the guest should not depend on what BIOS we're using.
>
> Indeed.  In theory even the switch of the option rom loading should 
> work just fine.  After migration old bios and roms are still in 
> memory, the next reboot will be the world switch to new seabios, new 
> roms, new way to deploy roms and everything.
>
> Lets see how this works out in practice ...

BTW, I've got the series in staging now and am testing it.  I've folded 
in the changes we've passed around and updated the commit log appropriately.

If you've got additional changes, please send them out, otherwise, let 
me know if you're happy with what's in staging.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> cheers,
>   Gerd
>