On 6 August 2015 at 14:25, Andrew Jones <drjo...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 01:55:14PM +0100, Leif Lindholm wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 02:28:03PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote: >> > In the least I wouldn't want to get burned twice, so I'd prefer to >> > see the SPCR code actually get into Linux first this time. That >> > would also allow us to point at something when we start breaking >> > guests. >> >> So, if that's the way it has to be, that's the way it has to be. >> I'd just prefer not having different pieces of firmware validating >> different software behaviours for the same thing. > > Yeah, now it's messy. I'm actually OK with this QEMU patch, with regard > to the downstream stuff that I'm involved with, but other downstreams > may not be so flexible... We need Peter to chime in with his opinion, > CCed.
Could somebody who understands ACPI and the ramifications here let me know if I should apply this patch, please? (since we're now post-2.4) thanks -- PMM
