From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB30A21A134BB for ; Wed, 3 May 2017 06:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F30DC054C5F; Wed, 3 May 2017 13:35:23 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 0F30DC054C5F Authentication-Results: ext-mx08.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx08.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lersek@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 0F30DC054C5F Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-116-118.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.116.118]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E218A17D62; Wed, 3 May 2017 13:35:18 +0000 (UTC) To: Paolo Bonzini , Gerd Hoffmann , "Kinney, Michael D" References: <1382eb04-9646-133b-9ce5-8293cb54745f@redhat.com> <1493794647.8581.144.camel@redhat.com> <49e28e04-2a61-c3d8-790a-3c08cf664a07@redhat.com> <071089ea-c73b-3851-899f-829bfe532867@redhat.com> Cc: "Fan, Jeff" , "Yao, Jiewen" , edk2-devel-01 From: Laszlo Ersek Message-ID: <184f2ebc-ea97-ccf3-7207-ad7b49d9c903@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 15:35:17 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.32]); Wed, 03 May 2017 13:35:23 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: SMRAM sizes on large hosts X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 May 2017 13:35:23 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 05/03/17 15:26, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 03/05/2017 15:14, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> I'd prefer a solution that would keep the fw logic / code flow related >> to register configuration intact, and would just replace a few numbers / >> constants if possible. > > I see. In my other answer I tried to keep it as intact as possible. > > I'm a bit worried about the limits on the number of fw-cfg files. We've promoted that to a device property in QEMU commit e12f3a13e2e1 ("fw-cfg: turn FW_CFG_FILE_SLOTS into a device property", 2017-01-12), and we've raised the count to 0x20 for 2.9 machtypes, in commit a5b3ebfd23bc ("fw-cfg: bump "x-file-slots" to 0x20 for 2.9+ machine types", 2017-01-12). ... Or does your concern already account for those? Thank you, Laszlo >> And, whether the "largest TSEG size" (number of MBs) that QEMU exposed >> in the new fw_cfg file depended *only* on the machine type, or on other >> config elements as well (such as max VCPU count), that would be QEMU's >> prerogative of course. >> >> To me personally, the ability (via fw_cfg) to ask / request the >> following looks best: >> >> - Is there a dynamic largest? (= does the fw_cfg file exist?) >> - What is it exactly? (= what are its contents?) >> - Please give me it. (= write 11b)