On 25.01.2010, at 18:46, Jes Sorensen wrote: > On 01/25/10 18:28, Alexander Graf wrote: >>>> That way we'd get 2 entries and the chance to enhance them later on. >>>> In fact, it might even make sense to pass the whole table in such a >>>> form. That way qemu generates all of the e820 tables and we can >>>> declare whatever we want. Just add a type field in the table. >>> >>> I am fine with having QEMU build the e820 tables completely if there is >>> a consensus to take that path. >> >> I agree. We better get this right :-). I don't want to maintain 5 >> versions of an 380 fw_cfg interface. > > Looking at the internals, some of the e820 entries are based on compile > time constants for the BIOS, so it will be hard to pass those from > QEMU, but we could do it in a way so we pass a number of additional > e820 entries. Ie. address, length, and type. Yes, sounds good. Should be fairly extensible then. What about memory holes? Do we need to take care of them? Alex-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
