On Mon, 2013-02-11 at 19:41 -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 05:28:11PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > Does QEMU_HARDWARE mean hardware "defined" (so to speak) by QEMU (e.g.
> > > virtio type stuff) or does it include regular hardware emulated by QEMU
> > > (e.g. real IDE
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 05:28:11PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > Does QEMU_HARDWARE mean hardware "defined" (so to speak) by QEMU (e.g.
> > virtio type stuff) or does it include regular hardware emulated by QEMU
> > (e.g. real IDE disks etc). Xen uses the latter but not the former. The
> > use
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:43:29PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-02-11 at 10:54 +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 14:08 -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > > This patch series is less ambitious than the previous - SeaBIOS can't
> > > be compiled for multiple platforms
On Mon, 2013-02-11 at 12:43 +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> I don't know if distros prefer to have fewer images or not, once you
> have 2 I guess having N is not such a big deal for something the size
> and build time of SeaBIOS.
Probably not. It's not as if supporting Xen is an otherwise trivial
exe
On 02/08/13 09:00, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 04:44 +, Li, Elvin wrote:
>>
>> I guess this virtual disk comes from a virtual disk
>> controller. Now you only fill an entry in BBS table to show legacy
>> boot options, I am unclear that how you enable real legacy boot
On Mon, 2013-02-11 at 10:54 +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 14:08 -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > This patch series is less ambitious than the previous - SeaBIOS can't
> > be compiled for multiple platforms (eg, QEMU, CSM, coreboot) at the
> > same time.
>
> Out of interest
On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 17:14 -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 02:50:35PM +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 14:45 +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't see this with rel-1.7.2. Bisecting fingers
> > > commit 6ca0460fbb8ecfa5d42c8928b7ee71f20d
Maybe time to get a naming standard before it gets too messy?
Perhaps adapt the current naming standard used by the Linux kernel or
something?
Either way, there is no reason for Xen to be named XEN.
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 4:27 AM, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 08:42:31PM +0
On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 14:08 -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> This patch series is less ambitious than the previous - SeaBIOS can't
> be compiled for multiple platforms (eg, QEMU, CSM, coreboot) at the
> same time.
Out of interest, why not include Xen in that list? Do we gain any real
benefit from b
On Mon, 2013-02-11 at 12:26 +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> On 02/11/13 12:18, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > Then add a CONFIG_QEMU_DRIVERS menu where we put all virtual
> hardware
> > drivers in. So when building for real hardware you'll just say 'n'
> > there and all virtual drivers will be skipped.
>
On 02/11/13 12:18, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Then add a CONFIG_QEMU_DRIVERS menu where we put all virtual hardware
> drivers in. So when building for real hardware you'll just say 'n'
> there and all virtual drivers will be skipped.
Ah, just saw your new series adds CONFIG_QEMU_HARDWARE for that, gr
Hi,
> I'm not sure what would depend on that. The virtio drivers don't need
> to. You just won't find those devices on real hardware. And hell, if
> someone actually makes real hardware that behaves like a virtio block
> device, why *shouldn't* it work?
It's basically two things we have:
(a)
12 matches
Mail list logo
