From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60600 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ODaMi-0001gt-Jl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 16 May 2010 05:42:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ODaMh-00018W-4k for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 16 May 2010 05:42:32 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f45.google.com ([209.85.161.45]:58555) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ODaMg-00018P-UJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 16 May 2010 05:42:31 -0400 Received: by fxm9 with SMTP id 9so2713419fxm.4 for ; Sun, 16 May 2010 02:42:30 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <4BEFBE03.9090003@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 16 May 2010 11:42:27 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/2] pckbd improvements List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Blue Swirl Cc: qemu-devel On 05/15/2010 11:49 AM, Blue Swirl wrote: > In 2/2, A20 logic changes a bit but I doubt any guest would be broken > if A20 line written through I/O port 92 couldn't be read via i8042. > The reverse (write using i8042 and read port 92) will work. Why take the risk? PaolO