On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 06:08:53PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 28/07/2014 17:59, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
> > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 05:34:16PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> This patch avoids that similar changes break QEMU again in the future.
> >> QEMU will now hard-code 64k as the
Il 28/07/2014 17:59, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 05:34:16PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> This patch avoids that similar changes break QEMU again in the future.
>> QEMU will now hard-code 64k as the maximum ACPI table size, which
>> (despite being an order of magnitude
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 05:34:16PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> This patch avoids that similar changes break QEMU again in the future.
> QEMU will now hard-code 64k as the maximum ACPI table size, which
> (despite being an order of magnitude smaller than 640k) should be enough
> for everyone.
Fam
This patch avoids that similar changes break QEMU again in the future.
QEMU will now hard-code 64k as the maximum ACPI table size, which
(despite being an order of magnitude smaller than 640k) should be enough
for everyone.
Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek
Tested-by: Igor Mammedov
Signed-off-by: Paolo
This patch avoids that similar changes break QEMU again in the future.
QEMU will now hard-code 64k as the maximum ACPI table size, which
(despite being an order of magnitude smaller than 640k) should be enough
for everyone.
Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek
Tested-by: Igor Mammedov
Signed-off-by: Paolo
