qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V4 4/4] fw_cfg: insert fw_cfg file blobs via qem


From: Michael S. Tsirkin
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V4 4/4] fw_cfg: insert fw_cfg file blobs via qemu cmdline
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 10:28:28 +0200

On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 09:37:13AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> On Mo, 2015-06-01 at 14:43 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > 
> > On 01/06/2015 14:41, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 02:39:17PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 01/06/2015 14:38, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > >>> I'm sorry - I don't understand. It's easy to do the right thing.  Just
> > >>> add the opt prefix. Why insist on user doing the right thing, and punish
> > >>> violations with failing at random?
> > >>>
> > >>> If it's useful for developers somehow, add a config flag for that.
> > >>
> > >> You've already been explained that config flags are not an answer.
> > > 
> > > Oh then just #define FW_CFG_USER_PREFIX "opt/".
> > > 
> > > Developers can edit that to "" if they want to play.
> > 
> > Shall we agree to just let Gerd decide since he's handling these patches?
> 
> I can't see a strong reasons to change things.  The docs clearly
> recommend to use opt/ prefix to avoid conflicts.  That is fine IMHO.
> 
> I don't feel like enforcing that in code, being able to use something
> else can be useful for debugging/testing purposes.  For example there
> are some etc/* things seabios looks at which qemu has no support for.
> One can also supply option roms with the new switch.
> 
> cheers,
>   Gerd

Well isn't this exactly the problem?
Once one does, then qemu gains same option rom and things break.

-- 
MST



reply via email to

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