* Paolo Bonzini (pbonz...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > On 19/11/2014 15:13, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > Since we've wondered off the actual ACPI table stuff into general > > ROM sizing, I'd like to propose some concrete fixes: > > > > 1) We explicitly name the bios file in a .romfile attribute for > > all ROMs. > > 2) The code that uses .romfile has an expansion for $MACHINETYPE > > 3) We actually symlink all of those together, anyone who wants/has > > to deal with different versions can downstream. > > 4) The machine types contain size attributes for the ROMs that > > are generoously larger than the ROMs anyone currently uses. > > > > I think 1..3 should deal with those of us who have to deal with different > > ROM versions on different machine types. > > It should, but it's a solution in search of a problem.
Well we already do something close to 1 & 2 downstream but more ad-hoc; it's just a generalisation (and 4 from padding the size of our images). So we already had that problem. > > > 4 might be good enough for the ACPI tables if you can bound it. > > Already doing that (rounding to 128k, warning if >64k), but it is not a > definitive solution. > > We also do (4) for ROMs, since VGA BIOSes use only 36k out of 64k and > iPXE ROMs use only ~200k out of 256k. > > Paolo -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
