From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45907) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UO4xo-0004Wh-5g for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 07:37:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UO4xh-0006c2-2N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 07:37:48 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:14631) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UO4xg-0006bh-QI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 07:37:41 -0400 Message-ID: <515EB806.80206@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 13:39:50 +0200 From: Laszlo Ersek MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1363821803-3380-1-git-send-email-lersek@redhat.com> <515C5C73.1010404@redhat.com> <87hajncrcr.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <515D313F.4010109@redhat.com> <20130404232249.GA26674@morn.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20130404232249.GA26674@morn.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/11] build ACPI MADT for fw_cfg clients List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin O'Connor , Anthony Liguori Cc: mst@redhat.com, kraxel@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 04/05/13 01:22, Kevin O'Connor wrote: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 09:52:31AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> On 04/03/13 22:05, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>> Laszlo Ersek writes: >>>> Any chance patches 01 to 09 could be considered? Esp. 06 which removes >>>> an out-of-bounds access (an innocent-looking one, admittedly). >>>> >>>> I'm OK too if the series is dropped (patch 11 was the main motivation, >>>> but the interface that it extends was deemed unsuitable going forward on >>>> the seabios list). I'd just like to hear the maintainer with >>>> jurisdiction say the NAK. ("Too expensive even to review for too little >>>> gain" is a good reason.) >>> >>> The whole thing looks pretty nice to me. >> >> That's awesome, thank you very much! >> >>> I'll merge the full series in >>> a day or so unless anyone objects. >> >> For transparency's sake: Kevin, this is where you'd object to patch 11: >> it adds an MADT to the existing fw_cfg blob, which, combined with an >> older (=current) SeaBIOS, leads to a duplicated MADT; see also the blurb >> in 00/11 which quotes that from > > Right. I don't think we should commit patch 11 as that would cause > the current QEMU/SeaBIOS to incorrectly create two MADT tables. We > should instead create the new MADT in a separate fw_cfg entry. > > The other patches in the series look sane to me. Anthony committed 01-10/11, I'm going to rework & post 11/11 as a separate patch. Many thanks. Laszlo