On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:29:24PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> 2010/11/15 Gleb Natapov :
> > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:50:13PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
> >> > ---
> >> > hw/fw_cfg.c | 14 +++
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 03:12:02PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 02:37:08PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > So that's unavoidable if we think paths are correct.
> > > But if we know they are wrong, we are better off
> > > correcting them first IMO.
> > >
> > They are
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 02:37:08PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > So that's unavoidable if we think paths are correct.
> > But if we know they are wrong, we are better off
> > correcting them first IMO.
> >
> They are correct for x86. My patch set does not even tries to cover all
> HW. If sparc wa
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 02:23:20PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 02:16:05PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 01:52:30PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 01:45:04PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 18, 201
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 02:16:05PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 01:52:30PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 01:45:04PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 01:38:31PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 18, 201
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 01:52:30PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 01:45:04PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 01:38:31PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:18:27PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 17, 201
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 01:45:04PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 01:38:31PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:18:27PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:54:27PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> > > > 2010/11/16 Gleb Natapov :
>
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 01:38:31PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:18:27PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:54:27PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> > > 2010/11/16 Gleb Natapov :
> > > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 06:30:19PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:18:27PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:54:27PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> > 2010/11/16 Gleb Natapov :
> > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 06:30:19PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> > >> >> Perhaps the FW path should use device class names if no name is
> >
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 09:54:27PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> 2010/11/16 Gleb Natapov :
> > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 06:30:19PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >> >> Perhaps the FW path should use device class names if no name is
> >> >> specified.
> >> > What do you mean by "device class name". We can
2010/11/16 Gleb Natapov :
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 06:30:19PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> >> Perhaps the FW path should use device class names if no name is specified.
>> > What do you mean by "device class name". We can do something like this:
>> > if (dev->child_bus.lh_first)
>> > return
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 09:22:45AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:52:19PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > I also have an ulterior motive here. If the boot order is exposed as
> > a newline separated list via an entry in QEMU_CFG_FILE_DIR, then this
> > becomes free for co
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 06:30:19PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >> Perhaps the FW path should use device class names if no name is specified.
> > What do you mean by "device class name". We can do something like this:
> > if (dev->child_bus.lh_first)
> > return dev->child_bus.lh_first->info->n
2010/11/16 Gleb Natapov :
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:29:24PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> 2010/11/15 Gleb Natapov :
>> > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:50:13PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> >> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
>> >> > ---
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:52:19PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 03:36:25PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:26:35AM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
>> > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:40:08AM +02
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:52:19PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 03:36:25PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:26:35AM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:40:08AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 03:36:25PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:26:35AM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:40:08AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:40:33PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > > > Why not just return a newli
2010/11/15 Gleb Natapov :
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:50:13PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
>> > ---
>> > hw/fw_cfg.c | 14 ++
>> > hw/fw_cfg.h | 4 +++-
>> > sysemu.h | 1 +
>> > vl.
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 03:36:25PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> Hmm BTW I do not see proper endianness
> handling in FILE_DIR.
>
That's just me. Everything it OK there with endianness.
--
Gleb.
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:26:35AM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:40:08AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:40:33PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > > Why not just return a newline separated list that is null terminated?
> > >
> > Doing it like th
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:40:08AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:40:33PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > Why not just return a newline separated list that is null terminated?
> >
> Doing it like this will needlessly complicate firmware side. How do you
> know how much me
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:50:13PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
> > ---
> > hw/fw_cfg.c | 14 ++
> > hw/fw_cfg.h | 4 +++-
> > sysemu.h | 1 +
> > vl.c | 51
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:53:50AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:40:08AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:40:33PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 05:39:41PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * This fu
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:40:08AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:40:33PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 05:39:41PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > +/*
> > > + * This function returns device list as an array in a below format:
> > > + * +-+---
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:40:33PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 05:39:41PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * This function returns device list as an array in a below format:
> > + * +-+-+---+-+---+--
> > + * | n | l1 | devp
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 05:39:41PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> +/*
> + * This function returns device list as an array in a below format:
> + * +-+-+---+-+---+--
> + * | n | l1 | devpath1| l2 | devpath2 | ...
> + * +-+-+---+---
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
> ---
> hw/fw_cfg.c | 14 ++
> hw/fw_cfg.h | 4 +++-
> sysemu.h | 1 +
> vl.c | 51 +++
> 4 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 1 dele
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 09:13:03PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 08:49:59PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> >> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
> >> > ---
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 08:49:59PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
>> > ---
>> > hw/fw_cfg.c | 14 ++
>> > hw/fw_cfg.h | 4 +++-
>>
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 08:52:37PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > +
> > > +len = strlen(bootpath);
> > > +list = qemu_realloc(list, total + len + 1);
> > > +list[total++] = len;
> > > +memcpy(&list[total], bootpath, len);
> > > +total += len;
> > > +
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 08:52:37PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 08:41:37PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 05:39:41PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
> > > ---
> > > hw/fw_cfg.c | 14 ++
> > > h
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 08:49:59PM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
> > ---
> > hw/fw_cfg.c | 14 ++
> > hw/fw_cfg.h | 4 +++-
> > sysemu.h | 1 +
> > vl.c | 51
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
> ---
> hw/fw_cfg.c | 14 ++
> hw/fw_cfg.h | 4 +++-
> sysemu.h | 1 +
> vl.c | 51 +++
> 4 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 1 dele
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 08:41:37PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 05:39:41PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
> > ---
> > hw/fw_cfg.c | 14 ++
> > hw/fw_cfg.h |4 +++-
> > sysemu.h|1 +
> > vl.c| 51 +++
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 05:39:41PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov
> ---
> hw/fw_cfg.c | 14 ++
> hw/fw_cfg.h |4 +++-
> sysemu.h|1 +
> vl.c| 51 +++
> 4 files changed, 69 insertions(+
35 matches
Mail list logo
