Il 21/08/2013 19:07, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 07:01:39PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 21/08/2013 19:01, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
The pvpanic situation is already messed up enough. Let us give our libvirt friends an easy indication that we have untied our side.
Not-yet-signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> ... because we first have to determine how to expose the device's existence in the ACPI tables or in fw_cfg.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> So it's isa-pvpanic meaning "I-am-sure-this-is-the-last-bug-pvpanic"
More like "we tested pvpanic for more than 2 weeks and did not find anything that's utterly broken in the design".
And more practically "you are sure there are no traces of builtin pvpanic; also, panicked state is reversible".
isa-pvpanic does not look like a sane way to say that.
NACK
You know that a single developer's NACK counts nothing (it can be you, it can be me), don't you? Paolo