Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 00/04] HVM firmware passthrough

[Ross Philipson <Ross.Philipson@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [mailto:konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 9:56 AM
> To: Ross Philipson
> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Will; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 00/04] HVM firmware passthrough
> 
> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 07:14:11PM -0500, Ross Philipson wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Konrad Rzeszutek Will [mailto:ketuzsezr@xxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 7:00 PM
> > > To: Ross Philipson
> > > Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 00/04] HVM firmware passthrough
> > >
> > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 3:26 PM, Ross Philipson
> <Ross.Philipson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xen-devel-
> > > >> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ross Philipson
> > > >> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 1:55 PM
> > > >> To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >> Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 00/04] HVM firmware passthrough
> > > >>
> > > >> This patch series introduces support of loading external blocks
> of
> > > >> firmware
> > > >> into a guest. These blocks can currently contain SMBIOS and/or
> ACPI
> > > >> firmware
> > > >> information that is used by HVMLOADER to modify a guests virtual
> > > >> firmware at
> > > >> startup. These modules are only used by HVMLOADER and are
> effectively
> > > >> discarded after HVMLOADER has completed.
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > Is there anything else I need to do to get this patch series
> accepted?
> > >
> > > Address the comments we had. I believe it was on making this be part
> of
> > > "xl" guest config parsing.
> >
> > Oh I thought I did. I said I would submit a separate set of patches
> for
> > the work in xl once the earlier bits were in. Is that not an
> acceptable
> > approach?
> 
> Somehow I missed that. I thought there were also comments on how the
> call
> to the library should be done? As in - not introduce a new one but alter
> the existing one? Or am I thinking of a different patchset?

I am not sure if that is related to my patches. I had brought up the point
that the new xc_hvm_build() routine was never called from xl. I think the
consensus was that I should remedy that in the process of adding the support
for fw pass-through.

I planned to do xl after the first patch set went in - are there any vetoes
to that plan? Also since I will be adding parameters I suspect I need to
update the docs on the xl configuration files. Any pointers on how to do that
would be helpful. I see the man page source in docs/man/xl.cfg.pod.5; is
the wiki information generated off of this?

Thanks
Ross

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel