Re: [DISCUSSION] Allow ACPI default OEM ID and OEM table ID fields to be set.

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 05:34:50PM +0100, Antoine Damhet wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 08:29:41AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 01:50:12PM +0100, Antoine Damhet wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 06:09:11AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 09:13:22PM +0100, Antoine Damhet wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:04:55AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 01:32:51PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 02:27:11PM +0100, Antoine Damhet wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Exactly so I ask myself whether it's worth it, their next version
> > will check CPUID and then where are we?
> 
> Then I guess they will have to admit that they are purposefully blocking
> VM use and it's not our problem anymore.
> 
> > But maybe it's time we just changed all these IDs to e.g. QEMU.
> > We are very far from bochs generated tables by now.
> 
> That's a good idea, but I still think they should be user override-able
> (unless you think it would be a heavy maintenance burden, in that case
> you are king in your castle :D )

Fundamentally there's a chance that if you get unlucky
with your OEM ID some software somewhere will look for
it and try to activate some vendor specific behaviour.
So giving users full control here isn't all that safe ...

Question btw, are you also supplying a SLIC table?


> > Question is will this cause annoyances with e.g. windows guests?
> 
> Windows 10 guests seems unaffected, I cannot say for the other
> versions/servers editions.
> 
> > Igor what's your experience with this?
> 
> [...]
> 
> -- 
> Antoine 'xdbob' Damhet