[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] Add a module for retrieving SMBIOS information

From: Prarit Bhargava
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add a module for retrieving SMBIOS information
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 10:04:48 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20131028 Thunderbird/17.0.10

On 02/02/2015 02:26 PM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> On 02/02/2015 12:09 PM, David Michael wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 6:20 AM, Prarit Bhargava <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> On 02/01/2015 09:05 PM, David Michael wrote:
>>>> * grub-core/commands/i386/smbios.c: New file.
>>>> * grub-core/Makefile.core.def (smbios): New module.
>>>> * docs/grub.texi (smbios): New node.
>>>> (Command-line and menu entry commands): Add a menu entry for smbios.
>>>> ---
>>>> Hi,
>>>> There was some interest on help-grub about supporting SMBIOS access
>>>> upstream.
>>> OOC, why?  Why would you need to do this?  I'm certainly not against doing 
>>> this
>>> but just wondering exactly why you want to do this.
>> The thread on grub-help asked about booting particular kernel versions
>> off a hot-pluggable drive based on the detected hardware, which this
>> would allow.
>> I originally wrote it to change what options are available based on
>> whether a disk is being booted physically or virtually.  Since QEMU
>> makes it easy to add SMBIOS entries on the command line, I've also
>> been using it for random tweaks like showing a vga_text boot menu
>> instead of gfxterm when running QEMU with "-display curses".
> Ah interesting David -- and good job on getting the efi.smbios stuff in there
> too as that's an easy thing to miss.  I'll take a closer look ...

FWIW, I think it looks fine and it definitely has a valid use case.  I'd suggest
that you update the description with Rajat's comment.

One odd thing in the patch (and it may be something weird on my end that I've
never seen before).  When I saved and applied your patch via 'git am', the patch
contained a few "^L" lines.  For example

/* Reference: DMTF Standard DSP0134 2.7.1 Section 6.1.3 */

Not sure why that happened, but I do see them in the patch as well as the email
you sent to the list.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]