J. Mayer wrote: > What about this patch ? Is there any remark ? Is it to be applied ?
I'm in favour, but I think I said so already. :-) > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > > From: J. Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org > > To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org > > Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] multiple boot devices > > Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 14:04:40 +0100 > > > > On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 01:18 +0000, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > > > J. Mayer wrote: > > > [snip] > > > > > > It restricts the letter to the ones historically allowed by Qemu, > > > > > > not to > > > > > > anything specific to any architecture or hw platform. What I like > > > > > > in my > > > > > > implementation, compared to the strchr..., is that it exactly tells > > > > > > the > > > > > > user which given device is incorrect. > > > > > > > > > > Well, here it makes no difference, strchr tells you exactly same as > > > > > much. > > > > > > > > Yes, you're right. Was thinking about the original strspn. > > > > > > > > > Instead of the check, the code could also allow everything from 'a' to > > > > > 'z' and then just AND the produced 32bit bitmap with a machine defined > > > > > bitmap that would be part of QEMUMachine. > > > > > > > > I guess we would better stop at 'n', because we can easily define a > > > > semantic for devices 'c' to 'm' (ie hard disk drives in a hardware > > > > platform specific order) but we have to define what means 'o' to 'z'. > > > > But I agree we would better extend it now, instead of having to rework > > > > it later... > > > > > > To select the network device to boot from would probably become a > > > 'n' 'o' 'p' 'q' series. > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > Here's a second pass cleanup, adding the machine dependant checks > > > > > > for > > > > > > the PC machine and the PowerPC ones. As one can see, the > > > > > > OpenHack'Ware > > > > > > firmware is able to boot from devices 'e' and 'f'. For the PowerPC > > > > > > machines, I choosed to try to boot from the first given usable > > > > > > device, > > > > > > some may not agree with this choice. It can be noticed that the > > > > > > available boot devices are not the same for PowerPC PreP, g3bw and > > > > > > mac99 > > > > > > machines. > > > > > > As I don't know the features and requirements for the other > > > > > > architectures, I prefered not to add any check for those ones. > > > > > > > > > > Most other machines ignore -boot and those that don't, shouldn't break > > > > > from the introduced change, so please commit it when you feel ok with > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > I'd like to know what are the feelings around about this patch and if > > > > there are specific requirements and/or problems for some platforms to be > > > > addressed before... > > > > > > I think the proposed scheme (and the implementation) is flexible enough > > > to accomodate all relevant platforms. > > > > Here's an updated patch that address the remark about network boot > > devices. > > > -- > J. Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Never organized > > > >
