Am 11.08.2013 12:33, schrieb Michael S. Tsirkin: > On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 10:27:31AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> On 08/02/2013 09:04 AM, Hu Tao wrote: >>> The problem with pvpanic being an internal device is that VMs running >>> operating systems without a driver for this device will have problems >>> when qemu will be upgraded (from qemu without this pvpanic). >>> >>> The outcome may be, for example: in Windows(let's say XP) the Device >>> manager will open a "new device" wizard and the device will appear as >>> an unrecognized device. On a cluster with hundreds of such VMs, If >>> that cluster has a health monitoring service it may show all the VMs >>> in a "not healthy" state. >>> >>> Reported-by: Marcel Apfelbaum <marce...@redhat.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Hu Tao <hu...@cn.fujitsu.com> >> >> NACK, >> >> this is premature. It is fundamentally a firmware problem. >> >> We have time to apply an even smaller patch that doesn't set >> has_pvpanic to true, and delay the whole feature to 1.7, if we do >> not fix the firmware in the next two weeks. >> >> Paolo > > I think this is not just a firmware problem. Adding device by default > was too rush, assumption was risk of guest bugs was 0. > > We are now seeing problems with bios guest code and with linux guest > drivers as well. Yes they all can be fixed, but we simply shouldn't > force this risk of broken guests on everyone. > > libvirt is the main user and libvirt people > indicated their preference to creating device with > -device pvpanic rather than a built-in one that > can't be removed. > > So please reconsider, and here's an ack from me. > > Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com>
NACK for this v1: As pointed out on the KVM call, we still need to keep the pvpanic device around by default for pc-*-1.5. Removing has_pvpanic completely therefore seems wrong. Can you submit a v2 for rc3 tomorrow? Andreas -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
