[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] sysfw: remove read-only pc_sysfw_flash_vs_r
|
From: |
Markus Armbruster |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] sysfw: remove read-only pc_sysfw_flash_vs_rom_bug_compatible |
|
Date: |
Tue, 04 Jun 2013 11:17:46 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) |
Jordan Justen <address@hidden> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> wrote:
>> The variable is not written anymore.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
>> ---
>> hw/block/pc_sysfw.c | 26 +-------------------------
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/block/pc_sysfw.c b/hw/block/pc_sysfw.c
>> index 412d1b0..c6d4be4 100644
>> --- a/hw/block/pc_sysfw.c
>> +++ b/hw/block/pc_sysfw.c
>> @@ -199,12 +199,6 @@ static void old_pc_system_rom_init(MemoryRegion
>> *rom_memory, bool isapc_ram_fw)
>> bios);
>> }
>>
>> -/*
>> - * Bug-compatible flash vs. ROM selection enabled?
>> - * A few older machines enable this.
>> - */
>> -bool pc_sysfw_flash_vs_rom_bug_compatible;
>
> Hmm. I think we still need this to retain the 1.2-1.5 compatible
> behavior. But, I think I maybe my kvm readonly series didn't properly
> resurrect the pc_sysfw_flash_vs_rom_bug_compatible switch.
It didn't (and its commit message failed to mention it tries).
Anyway, Paolo successfully argued for breaking backward compatibility:
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-05/msg02074.html