From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35853) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gpB6D-0008DX-2s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2019 07:05:41 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gpB6A-0005Lt-DV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2019 07:05:40 -0500 From: Markus Armbruster References: <87y378n5iy.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <871s4uobf0.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <75629302-84bb-ba19-cb2c-5edc34cffadb@redhat.com> <877eeldx9p.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <87bm3xazv3.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 13:05:11 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Peter Maydell's message of "Thu, 31 Jan 2019 10:34:32 +0000") Message-ID: <87sgx99gnc.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Configuring pflash devices for OVMF firmware List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Libvirt , Peter Krempa , Laszlo Ersek , QEMU Developers , Qemu-block Peter Maydell writes: > On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 10:24, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> 1. Make the device model default to some "correct" configuration, even >> if that setting is kind of arbitrary. That way, any code using new >> style gets an "incorrect" configuration only if it actively selects one. > > I don't think that's much better, because it will still > probably be wrong for the board. People writing board models > should define what their pflash device is, not plug in something > that's not what the hardware is. If you want to force people to select a sane configuration, set the default to some suitable nonsense the realize() method rejects.