On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 01:19:18PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
Yeah, but if we're shoving a lot of hardware-specific ACPI table generation into the guest's firmware, instead of just doing it on the qemu side where a number of us seem to think it belongs,
Hopefully this is not yet set in stone.
then there *is* a benefit to using Coreboot. When stuff changes on the qemu side and we have to update the table generation to match, you end up having to update just the Coreboot package, and *not* having to patch both SeaBIOS and OVMF.
We have all kind of logic in qemu. Some of it can thinkably be moved to a separate VM - it doesn't even need to run in the same VM as the guest - we could do it e.g. like kvm unit-test does, with less pain than running it in firmware. Not clear why would generating ACPI tables - which merely fills up an array of bytes from internal QEMU datastructures - should be the part where we start this modularization.