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

[Gleb Natapov]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 07:50:16AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> 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
I remember :) It allows to pass additional tables, not overwrite
tables that Seabios creates.

> build SMBIOS tables and pass them through to Seabios.
> 
I freely admit those are hacks :( And smbios one allows to much
control IMHO.


> Regards,
> 
> 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.
> >
> >--
> >                     Gleb.
> >
> >

--
                        Gleb.