On 30 July 2015 at 10:37, G Gregory <graeme.gregory@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 30 July 2015 at 10:24, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 30 July 2015 at 09:04, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 09:23:20AM +0800, Shannon Zhao wrote: >>>> >>>> Why do we drop the previous way using "QEMUXXXX"? Something I missed? >>> >>> So that guests that bind to this interface will work fine with non QEMU >>> implementations of virtio-mmio. >> >> I don't understand this sentence. If there are pre-existing >> non-QEMU virtio-mmio implementations, then they're using >> LNRO0005, and we should use it too. > > The only one I have come across is the ARM FVP model, and it happens > that I chose the ID and maintain the tables for that so I can change > it. > In fact, I would just add Name (_HID, "QEMUXXXX") Name (_HID, "1AF4103F") To the tables so tables work with old (internal) kernels and new! Graeme _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
