20 Dec
2010
20 Dec
'10
10:15 a.m.
On 12/20/2010 10:49 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 02:57:45PM -0500, Kevin
O'Connor wrote:
At least it should be documented.
What's the behaviour with a qemu that doesn't support the new port? We
don't strictly support it, but let's do so if we can.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 09:49:16PM +0200, Gleb
Natapov wrote:
Avi, are you OK with this patch ?
Yes, perhaps it all (including PCI hotplug controller) should be using
something else than hardcoded IO ports, but thats what we have now. On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 02:11:29PM -0500, Kevin
O'Connor wrote:
Yeah - I know - but I figured I'd ask for concensus before committing.
:-)
The committing of seabios patches that have a dependency on qemu/kvm
is an area that I think could be better clarified. I'm thinking that
if the seabios part depends on something in qemu/kvm then we should
have the corresponding kvm/qemu maintaners "ack" it.
-Kevin On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 03:08:59PM -0200,
Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> Use _RMV method to indicate whether device can be removed.
>
> Data is retrieved from QEMU via I/O port 0xae0c.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Tosatti<mtosatti(a)redhat.com>
Thanks Marcelo,
Can you add acked-bys from the qemu/kvm maintaners?
Marcelo is kvm maintainer ;) FWIW I tested this with Windows 7& XP
and it works as expected. The patch relies on patch not yes excepted
to qemu though.