On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:54:22AM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> The conversion passed the wrong opaque pointer, causing a crash on first use.
> Pass the correct opaque.
I've applied this, thanks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity
> ---
> hw/lance.c |2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 d
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 06:06:09PM -0300, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote:
> Add a test device which supports the kvmctl ioports,
> for running the KVM test suite.
>
> Usage:
>
> qemu
> -chardev file,path=/log/file/some/where,id=testlog
> -device pc-testdev,chardev=testlog
>
> lmr: I'
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 03:02:26PM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:00:57AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > On 2011-01-18 01:19, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:03:08AM +0100, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote:
> > >> Hi,
&
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 08:02:28PM +0100, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 03:02:26PM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:00:57AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > > On 2011-01-18 01:19, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Ja
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:55:22PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> Scott Wood wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 10:19:06 +0100
> > Alexander Graf wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Yeah, that one's tricky. Usually the way the memory resolver in qemu works
> >> is as follows:
> >>
> >> * kvm goes to qemu
> >> *
On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 08:13:04PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/03/2011 08:09 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > >
> > > Reluctant ack.
> >
> > What downsides do you see?
>
> The usual "it shouldn't be this way". Every other package (including, I
> think, glibc) uses the sanitized system headers. E
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 08:51:21AM +0200, Stefan Weil wrote:
> Anthony Liguori schrieb:
> > Sorry this explanation is long winded, but this is a messy situation.
> >
> > In Linux, there isn't a very consistent policy about userspace kernel
> > header inclusion. On a typical Linux system, you're li
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 08:15:58AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Edgar E. Iglesias wrote:
>> I don't feel very strongly about it but my gut feeling tells me we
>> shouldn't be doing this.
>>
>
> We have to. It's not just KVM, it's virtio, tun
IMO one of the biggest parts of infrastructure QEMU is missing
for embedded stuff is a common (qdev) way of modeling DMA backchannels.
Or devide to device channels or whatever you want to call it.
Would be nice if someone could bring this to qemu.
Cheers
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
