On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 04:45:45PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 06/17/15 16:18, Kevin O'Connor wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 03:57:36PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 02:45:05PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > >>> SeaBIOS expects OpenFirmware device paths in the "bootorder" fw_cfg file > >>> to follow the pattern > >>> > >>> /pci-root@N/pci@i0cf8/... > >> > >> It's kind of crazy, isn't it? > >> /pci@i0cf8/pci-root@N would make some sense: access rootN through cf8. > >> > >> But if bios needs to keep this for compatibility, maybe > >> we have too, to. Kevin? > > > > I have no issue with changing the string in SeaBIOS. In a previous > > email we discussed "/pci@i0cf8/pci-root@%x/" as well as > > "/pci@i0cf8,%x/", but anything that makes sense is fine with me. > > It is not fine with me. > > Every time there is another idea about this format, I get to update and > repost the OVMF series (consisting of 24 patches), which of course > nobody on qemu-devel@ and seabios@ cares about, while it is actually the > *only* thing that matters to me. Plus, this patch appeared in v4 and has > been reposted without changes twice. > > Honestly, the format looks outright retarded to me, but I didn't > complain, because adopting it (and not patching SeaBIOS at all) was the > most direct way forward. (Most direct in the sense that we're now at > v6.) I will *not* repeat the entire discussion about the format, and I > won't revisit that outcome. I have spent several nights and weekend days > on implementing SeaBIOS-compatible code in qemu and OVMF, and I won't go > back on that work. > > Similarly, the patch "hw/pci-bridge: create interrupt-less, hotplug-less > bridge for PXB" has been present in the QEMU series without functional > changes since v2. I've been aware that it doesn't meet Michael's taste > (that fact was documented in v2), but I'm appalled that it has taken 4 > reposts (v3 to v6) to arrive at specifics. Not only did that cause me to > miss 4 opportunities to post an ultimately acceptable patch, it also > wasted the reviews of Marcel and Markus, plus my work to address > Markus's review. > > I've been going out of my way to be cooperative, responsive, and just do > whatever I've been told, minimize the impact, etc. As I said, I'm > willing to post a v7 for the SHPC-less pci-bridge device model, but no > more versions, and no other changes. > > Thanks > Laszlo
Sorry you feel bad. Looks like the patches are pretty close to being ready. If you just address the comments about the bridge then I can merge patches 1-5 directly. We do need to agree about the correct paths however, this is host/guest interface which we have to maintain forever, and it's important to get it right. I kept hoping we can come up with something saner than the sequence # but oh well. Do you disagree with the statement that seabios path is currently incorrect? Kevin seems to agree. -- MST