> -----Original Message----- > From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:m...@redhat.com] > Sent: 18 June 2013 13:52 > To: Laszlo Ersek > Cc: Paul Durrant; qemu-devel@nongnu.org > Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Remove hardcoded xen-platform > device initialization (v4) > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 02:37:58PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > > > (xen-devel snipped) > > > > On 06/18/13 13:16, Paul Durrant wrote: > > > Because of concerns over backwards compatibility and a suggestion that > > > xenfv should be retired in favour of using the pc machine type I have re- > > > worked my original patch into 2 patches: > > > > > > [PATCH 1/2] Allow use of pc machine type (accel=xen) for Xen HVM > > > [PATCH 2/2] Move hardcoded initialization of xen-platform device. > > > > > > Application of both these patches allows alternative pc machine types to > be > > > used with the accel=xen option, but preserves the hardcoded creation of > > > the xen-platform device only for machine type xenfv. > > > > > > v3: > > > - Add test for xen_enabled() that went missing in v2 > > > > > > v4: > > > - Remove erroneous whitespace hunk > > > - Replace hw_error() with fprintf()+exit(1) > > > - Add braces to single-line if > > > > can you please offer an opinion in the > > > > [PATCH 1/2] pvpanic: initialization cleanup > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/216940 > > > > thread? > > > > >From where I stand (which is "quite afar" :)) this series of yours seems > > somewhat related to my doubt there. > > > > Thanks! > > Laszlo > > OK will make it skip fwcfg as we did earlier. > Thanks for the review. >
Yes, I think the assert(fw_cfg) would be problematic in the xen case where, up until my patch, machine types was necessarily xenfv. Paul
