Hi Wei,
On 26/09/2017 18:52, Wei Huang wrote:
>
>
> On 09/26/2017 10:37 AM, Andrew Jones wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 04:28:03PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On 26 September 2017 at 11:54, Andrew Jones wrote:
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 08:51:15AM -0500, Wei Huang
On 09/26/2017 10:37 AM, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 04:28:03PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 26 September 2017 at 11:54, Andrew Jones wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 08:51:15AM -0500, Wei Huang wrote:
Instead of using "1.0" as the system version
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 04:28:03PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 26 September 2017 at 11:54, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 08:51:15AM -0500, Wei Huang wrote:
> >> Instead of using "1.0" as the system version of SMBIOS, we should use
> >> mc->name for
On 26 September 2017 at 11:54, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 08:51:15AM -0500, Wei Huang wrote:
>> Instead of using "1.0" as the system version of SMBIOS, we should use
>> mc->name for mach-virt machine type. This matches with x86 code and
>> prevents the
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 08:51:15AM -0500, Wei Huang wrote:
> Instead of using "1.0" as the system version of SMBIOS, we should use
> mc->name for mach-virt machine type. This matches with x86 code and
> prevents the smbios_table.machine_type test of Avocado from failing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei
Instead of using "1.0" as the system version of SMBIOS, we should use
mc->name for mach-virt machine type. This matches with x86 code and
prevents the smbios_table.machine_type test of Avocado from failing.
Signed-off-by: Wei Huang
---
hw/arm/virt.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2