[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] QEMU e820 reservation patch

From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] QEMU e820 reservation patch
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:50:16 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20091209 Fedora/3.0-4.fc12 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0

On 02/23/2010 02:22 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 08:31:00PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:33:12AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 02:13:51PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
Are you thinking of moving qemu more torwards what coreboot does, or
did you have a different idea in mind?

We shouldn't compare coreboot with qemu. Qemu is a hardware. Coreboot
is part of a firmware.
Coreboot and qemu often face the same problems when trying to pass
information into the BIOS.  I think it helps to look at how others
have solved similar problems.

Since qemu is a HW and coreboot is one part of firmware stack the
information they are passing to Seabios is often fundamentally different.
It is OK for coreboot to create ACPI/SMBIOS/E820 tables and pass them to
Seabios, but it is not OK if qemu does that.

Actually, we do passthrough ACPI tables (you wrote that ;-)) and we build SMBIOS tables and pass them through to Seabios.


Anthony Liguori

  Information that QEMU pass
to Seabios can be divided into two types. First one can be classified
as board description. It is needed so Seabios would be able to support
more then one qemu configuration without recompile. Second is "bios
configuration" (boot priority, show bunner, etc). I don't know who
manages this information on coreboot + Seabios combo, but I think it
should be Seabios, so this kind of info should not be passed between
coreboot an Seabios at all.


reply via email to

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