linux-kernel - Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] arm: change vendor ID for virtio-mmio

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAFEAcA9zRArvxhihXZpTVZrMw7UmRHMqh5SOM8Jz83Fmasr1zA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 30 Jul 2015 10:24:11 +0100
From:	Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@...aro.org>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@...aro.org>,
	QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
	Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
	lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org" 
	<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Shannon Zhao <zhaoshenglong@...wei.com>,
	Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>,
	Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] arm: change vendor ID for virtio-mmio

On 30 July 2015 at 09:04, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> 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. If there are going to
be implementations of virtio-mmio in future, then they will
use whatever identifier we pick here. Either way, we get
interoperability. I don't see any difference between our
saying "the ID for virtio-mmio is QEMU0005" and saying
"the ID for virtio-mmio is 1AF4103F".

(The latter seems unnecessarily opaque to me, to be honest.
At least an ID string QEMUxxxx gives you a clue where to
look for who owns the thing.)

Note also that strictly you don't mean "non-QEMU implementations
of virtio-mmio", you mean "non-QEMU implementations of the
ACPI tables". The hardware implementation of virtio-mmio
doesn't care at all about the ACPI ID. (In fact the most
plausible other-implementation would be UEFI using its
own (hard-coded) ACPI tables on top of a QEMU vexpress-a15
model or something similar.)

-- PMM
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/