From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
To: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>,
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
Cc: "mst@redhat.com" <mst@redhat.com>,
"qemu-trivial@nongnu.org" <qemu-trivial@nongnu.org>,
"qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
"Markus Armbruster" <armbru@redhat.com>,
"McMillan, Erich" <erich.mcmillan@hp.com>,
"Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: PATCH: Increase System Firmware Max Size
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 18:06:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d7d0d37e-4bba-ab82-783d-06463d78d9cf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200911152353.GI1203593@redhat.com>
On 09/11/20 17:23, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> I don't see why we should have this as a hard coded
> limit that is not runtime configurable.
>
> IOW, why can't we keep our current default and provide a machine type
> property "firmware_max_size" which users can opt-in to setting if
> their particular firmware exceeds normal defaults. That won't impact
> us for migration compat in any way, and lets users have flexibility t
> do what they want.
Technically, this is fine, in my opinion.
My concerns (in distilled form, this time):
- The change increases maintenance burden.
- The change does not benefit most users of QEMU, as the intended guest
payload will not available to most of them at all (regardless of
licensing terms).
- The existence of the property may entice OVMF users to ask us to
enlarge the *current* OVMF firmware platform and to pack more stuff in
it. That is not OK. My counter-proposal ("please contribute a new
platform DSC/FDF under OvmfPkg, and assume co-reviewership for it")
would almost certainly not be acted upon.
That's all.
Thanks
Laszlo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-11 16:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-11 1:45 PATCH: Increase System Firmware Max Size McMillan, Erich
2020-09-11 7:55 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-11 8:34 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-11 14:53 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-11 15:06 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-11 15:22 ` McMillan, Erich via
2020-09-11 16:11 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-11 15:23 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-09-11 16:06 ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
2020-09-11 16:21 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-09-11 16:45 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-11 15:57 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-11 16:22 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-11 16:53 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-11 16:59 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-09-11 17:51 ` McMillan, Erich via
2020-09-15 19:09 ` McMillan, Erich
2020-09-15 19:10 ` McMillan, Erich via
2020-09-16 9:52 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-16 9:56 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-09-16 11:31 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-09-16 11:43 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-09-16 10:00 ` Laszlo Ersek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d7d0d37e-4bba-ab82-783d-06463d78d9cf@redhat.com \
--to=lersek@redhat.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=erich.mcmillan@hp.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=philmd@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-trivial@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).