Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> writes: > Il 15/05/2013 17:09, Markus Armbruster ha scritto: >>>>>> @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ void pc_system_firmware_init(MemoryRegion >>>>>> *rom_memory) >>>>>> * TODO This device exists only so that users can switch between >>>>>> * use of flash and ROM for the BIOS. The ability to switch was >>>>>> * created because flash doesn't work with KVM. Once it does, we >>>>>> - * should drop this device for new machine types. >>>>>> + * should drop this device. >>>>>> */ >>>>>> sysfw_dev = (PcSysFwDevice*) qdev_create(NULL, "pc-sysfw"); >>>>>> >>>> >>>> Why did you change the comment? >>> >>> Because we agreed on the way forward for the flash patches, and it will >>> remove the need for (a) changes to machine types; (b) pc_sysfw in >>> general. The device will be created iff a -pflash or -drive if=pflash >>> option is provided. Thus in principle you could use -M pc-0.12 with >>> -pflash and it will work. >> >> Yes, that's the way forward, and yes, that means we'll have no use for >> the "pc-sysfw" dummy device on new machine types. But why can we >> retroactively delete it from existing machine types? > > Because it would only affect TCG and people probably don't care much > about backwards-compatible machine types with TCG. I'd rather remove > the misfeature completely and start from scratch with a sane design, now > that we have it.
I'm fine with limiting our backward compatibility promise to KVM, I just didn't expect it.
