qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/27 RFC v7] ACPI memory hotplug


From: Igor Mammedov
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/27 RFC v7] ACPI memory hotplug
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 11:09:00 +0100

On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 16:45:20 +0200
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 03:37:55PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 15:43:27 +0200
> > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 02:39:10PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 08:20:56 +0200
> > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 03:38:21AM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > What's new since v6:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > * DIMM device is split to backend and frontend. Therefore following
> > > > > >   command/options were added for supporting it:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >   For memdev backend:
> > > > > >       CLI: -memdev-add
> > > > > >       Monitor/QMP: memdev-add
> > > > > >           with options: 'id' and 'size'
> > > > > >   For dimm frontend:
> > > > > >       option "size" became readonly, pulling it's size from 
> > > > > > attached backend
> > > > > >       added option "memdev" for specifying backend by 'id'
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > * Added Q35 support
> > > > > > * Added support for 32 bit guests
> > > > > > * build for i386 emulator (not tested)
> > > > > 
> > > > > OK so a large patchset so did not review yet.  One question
> > > > > due to the dependency on bios honouring etc/reserved-memory-end: is
> > > > > there some way to detect old BIOS and fail memory hotplug?
> > > > version negotiation between ASL and hardware could be used to that 
> > > > effect.
> > > > 
> > > > QEMU could start with present but disabled memory hotplug and if
> > > > QEMU and BIOS ASL could come in agreement that both support it in
> > > > compatible way, it could be enabled.
> > > 
> > > So at the moment there's no negotiation, is there?
> > Nope, I surely can add it in next iteration.
> 
> I'm not sure about this - if we add this we should make it
> a generic mechanism I think.
> It does not have to be part of this series.
> So maybe drop version for now ...
> 
Ok, I'll drop it for now.



reply via email to

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