On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 08:54:17PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 06:22:12PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
So here's the version with shift, that should do it
correctly. Add mere 8 lines of code.
I'll look into alignment and fseg now.
[...]
--- /dev/null
+++
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:09:16AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 08:23:44PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:38:58PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:03:01AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 09:07:04PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:09:16AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 08:23:44PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:38:58PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 09:54:33PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 09:07:04PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:09:16AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 08:23:44PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:26:34PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 09:54:33PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 09:07:04PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:09:16AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:33:17PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:26:34PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 09:54:33PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 09:07:04PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:37:28PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:33:17PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:26:34PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 09:54:33PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:49:14PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:37:28PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:33:17PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:26:34PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 08:23:44PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:38:58PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:03:01AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 08:39:41PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:38:58PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:03:01AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 08:39:41PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:41:48PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Okay I'm pretty close to
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:42:18PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:23:39PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+#include types.h // u8
+#include util.h // romfile_s
+
+/* ROM file linker interface. Linker uses little endian format */
+struct
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:42:18PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:23:39PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+#include types.h // u8
+#include util.h // romfile_s
+
+/* ROM file linker interface. Linker uses little endian format */
+struct
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:49:57AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
I know of the following quirks that would have to be handled:
1 - the RSDP must be in the f-segment (where as all other tables can
go into high memory).
2 - the RSDP has a checksum in a different location from the
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 08:39:41PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:41:48PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Okay I'm pretty close to posting some patches
that advance this project further, but wanted to
check something beforehand: there are several tables
that
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 06:37:32PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:03:01AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 08:39:41PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:41:48PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Okay I'm pretty
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:03:01AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 08:39:41PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:41:48PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Okay I'm pretty close to posting some patches
that advance this project further, but
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:23:39PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+#include types.h // u8
+#include util.h // romfile_s
+
+/* ROM file linker interface. Linker uses little endian format */
+struct linker_entry_s {
+u8 size; /* size in bytes including the header
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 05:55:22PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 09:45:54PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 03:21:08PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 09:14:47PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
I don't exactly
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:41:48PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Okay I'm pretty close to posting some patches
that advance this project further, but wanted to
check something beforehand: there are several tables
that point to other tables (for example: FADT points
to DSDT). What I did is
On 03/24/13 20:14, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 01:17:38PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
What do you think about using approach 2 as I outline at:
http://www.seabios.org/pipermail/seabios/2013-March/006020.html ?
The existing fw_cfg acpi table passing mechanism is pretty
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 08:02:21PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 21/03/2013 14:12, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:04:35PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 13:56 +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
- for an earlier qemu, the option must be set,
- for a
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 08:04:38PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 03:26:26PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:14:38PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 15:12 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Anyway, I am not against such
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 03:07:40PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 08:04:38PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
So, I see two ways to do this:
1 - update SeaBIOS with a patch series that makes it capable of
handling all tables via existing and new fw_cfg entries
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 01:17:38PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 03:07:40PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 08:04:38PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
So, I see two ways to do this:
1 - update SeaBIOS with a patch series that makes it
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 09:14:47PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
I don't exactly understand what do you mean by file.
A fw_cfg entry added using QEMU's fw_cfg_add_file() instead of
fw_cfg_add_bytes().
-Kevin
___
SeaBIOS mailing list
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 03:21:08PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 09:14:47PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
I don't exactly understand what do you mean by file.
A fw_cfg entry added using QEMU's fw_cfg_add_file() instead of
fw_cfg_add_bytes().
-Kevin
Looks good
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 09:45:54PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 03:21:08PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 09:14:47PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
I don't exactly understand what do you mean by file.
A fw_cfg entry added using QEMU's
As this is quite a bunch of work I would tend to avoid a flag day like
this so we can switch over tables one by one without building up big
patch queues.
True. I'm certainly open to ideas.
In practice, one never wants to mix QEMU generated ACPI tables with
SeaBIOS generated ACPI tables.
On 03/22/13 01:04, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 03:26:26PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
The advantage is that we can make progress
without keeping lots of patches out of tree.
Unless of course Kevin nacks this all ...
I think we need to have a plan for what the final
Il 22/03/2013 00:22, Kevin O'Connor ha scritto:
This also needs
to be resolved for SSDT tables, which can have zero, one, or more
instances.
Same argument as for the MADT.
The issue with the SSDT is that there can be many of them. QEMU may
wish to pass in 2 or more. If QEMU does
Il 21/03/2013 14:12, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:04:35PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 13:56 +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
- for an earlier qemu, the option must be set,
- for a later qemu the option must be clear
(no -acpitable switch must
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 08:22:30PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:53:05PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek ler...@redhat.com
I think we need to figure out what the final fw_cfg interface for
ACPI, SMBIOS, mptable, and PIR will be.
We can
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 09:18:50AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
On 03/21/13 07:23, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 08:22:30PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:53:05PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek ler...@redhat.com
I
Hi,
How about we don't bother to determine this at runtime at all?
Because it will be a PITA for testers + developers to figure the correct
.config switches of the day during the transition phase?
Why is it a PITA? Are you developing QEMU? Just use the makefile from
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 13:49 +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
How about we don't bother to determine this at runtime at all?
Because it will be a PITA for testers + developers to figure the correct
.config switches of the day during the transition phase?
Why is it a PITA? Are you
On 03/21/13 13:23, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Wed, 2013-03-20 at 20:22 -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:53:05PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek ler...@redhat.com
I think we need to figure out what the final fw_cfg interface for
ACPI, SMBIOS,
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:49:36PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
Hi,
How about we don't bother to determine this at runtime at all?
Because it will be a PITA for testers + developers to figure the correct
.config switches of the day during the transition phase?
Why is it a PITA?
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 13:56 +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
- for an earlier qemu, the option must be set,
- for a later qemu the option must be clear
(no -acpitable switch must be specified on the qemu cmldine ||
one -acpitable switch must load a MADT)
Hm, that sounds like it won't be
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 15:12 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:04:35PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 13:56 +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
- for an earlier qemu, the option must be set,
- for a later qemu the option must be clear
(no
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:14:38PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 15:12 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:04:35PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 13:56 +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
- for an earlier qemu, the option must be
Hi,
But I'm not sure I see any point in doing it table-by-table. Surely it
can be all or nothing?
It allows to merge changes piecewise and avoids piling up long patch
queues. It makes bisecting regressions easier. Also the logic if
table $foo is provided by qemu, just use it, otherwise
On Wed, 2013-03-20 at 20:22 -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:53:05PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek ler...@redhat.com
I think we need to figure out what the final fw_cfg interface for
ACPI, SMBIOS, mptable, and PIR will be.
Once we have
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 03:04:37PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
Today you can clone upstream seabios, build it, and the resulting image
will work on pretty much any qemu version since 0.12 or so. You don't
have to pick the correct config switches for your particular qemu
version, it just
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 09:18:50AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
On 03/21/13 07:23, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 08:22:30PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:53:05PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek ler...@redhat.com
I
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 03:26:26PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:14:38PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 15:12 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Anyway, I am not against such runtime flags.
If we add to this an option to build a minimal
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek ler...@redhat.com
---
src/acpi.c | 19 ---
1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/acpi.c b/src/acpi.c
index 8bbc92b..611553e 100644
--- a/src/acpi.c
+++ b/src/acpi.c
@@ -797,13 +797,13 @@ acpi_setup(void)
struct
46 matches
Mail list logo
