On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 04:07:16PM +0100, Peter Stuge wrote: > Gleb Natapov wrote: > > BBS specification is broken since it doesn't provide a way for > > discovered boot method (BCV) to be linked back to a device it will > > boot from. Nothing we can do to fix this except moving to EFI (an > > hope the problem is fixed there). > > There is that option, or there could be some simple improvement of > our own, which works in QEMU and maybe even adds value to coreboot. > But then there would be a bit of novel development in firmware - that > can't be a good thing, right? > I am all for novel development in firmware, but unfortunately I do not see what can we do in Seabios + qemu to fix this shortcoming. The problem should be fixed in each and every option rom. Option rom may set device address somewhere in pnp header for instance. > > > Spec says that in that case user probably will want to adjust boot > > order anyway and will enter boot menu by itself. Sorry excuse for > > failing to provide proper functionality if you ask me :) > > I agree. I can not believe the absolute resistance to innovation in > this field. > Interested parties want everyone to move to EFI I guess. > Isn't the scope of BBS logic limited to boot time? (There are calls > to do settings, but that's no problem.) > > Maybe it would be possible for SeaBIOS to provide what looks like BBS > to the guest, but on the other side there is something more > intelligent going on, be it together with QEMU or coreboot? > > I don't how it can be done without cooperation with option roms. -- Gleb. -- 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
