On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 02:22:54PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 09:37:01AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>> The backdoor interface is deprecated (from a VMware perspective) and
>>> is pretty terrible. I'll go through and do a more thorough review
>>> of the patches Chris posted but one thing I already know I'd like to
>>> see the
>> Review my last submission I linked above then too.
> Applying the -uuid support without making use of that uuid anywhere
> isn't very useful.
You can read it from monitor, so management software can benefit from
it. And this will reduce my patch backlog :)
>>> UUID plumbed through the SMBIOS tables for x86. That's a requirement
>>> in my mind for adding a -uuid option. I see no harm in also
>>> supporting the backdoor interface but the primary way to expose a
>>> UUID should be SMBIOS.
>> I am not sure I understand what you mean. Currently SMBIOS tables are
>> built by bochs bios and UUID backdoor is needed to fill in missing info.
> But that patch that got pushed into the Bochs BIOS was wrong.
> So here's what I'd like to see in order to apply these patches:
> 1) A new patch to the Bochs BIOS that used CMOS to pass a UUID (or
> possibly an OF data structure as Blue Swirl suggested--although CMOS is
We will run out of space in CMOS quickly if we will use it as qemu->bios
communication channel. Is passing pointer to memory location (Blue Swirl
suggestion) acceptable solution by everyone?