From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56636) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z6yIN-0003v7-8g for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 05:45:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z6yII-00041n-Nu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 05:45:39 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47451) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z6yII-00040v-IT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 05:45:34 -0400 Message-ID: <5587D93B.2060307@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 11:45:31 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1432686576-14816-1-git-send-email-pcacjr@zytor.com> <1434933423-10496-1-git-send-email-pcacjr@zytor.com> <20150622104151-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20150622104151-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 1/3] ich9: add TCO interface emulation List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Paulo Alcantara Cc: seabios@seabios.org, Paulo Alcantara , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 22/06/2015 10:43, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Given that support is known to be partial, would it make sense > to keep it disabled by default for 2.4? What is partial about it? In fact, considering that q35 behavior is still experimental it makes no sense to even make it conditional. We discussed this on IRC and I was hoping to hear you reply "sorry, I was wrong". Instead, I get this. Michael, I'm seriously getting annoyed by this behavior. Stop scaring away contributors. Paolo > This way in 2.5 we won't need to add more flags to stay bug compatible.