On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 02:02:18PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 02:43:44PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 12:03:36 +0100 > > "Daniel P. Berrange" <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 06:59:24PM +0200, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > > See docs/specs/vmcoreinfo.txt for details. > > > > > > > > "etc/vmcoreinfo" fw_cfg entry is added when using "-device vmcoreinfo". > > > > > > > > > > I'm wondering if you considered just adding the entry to fw_cfg by > > > default, without requiring any -device arg ? Unless I'm misunderstanding, > > > this doesn't feel like a device to me - its just a well known bucket > > > in fw_cfg IIUC ? Obviously its existance would need to be tied to > > > the latest machine type for ABI reasons though. The benefit of this > > > is that it would "just work" without us having to plumb it through to > > > all the downstream applications that use QEMU for mgmt guest (OpenStack, > > > oVirt, GNOME Boxes, virt-manager, and countless other mgmt apps). > > it follows model set by pvpanic device, it's easier to manage from migration > > POV, one could use it even for old machine types with new qemu (just by > > adding > > device, it makes instance not backwards migratable to old qemu but should > > work > > for forward migration) and if user doesn't need it, device could be just > > omitted > > from CLI. > > Sure but it means that in effect no one will have this functionality enabled > for several years. pvpanic has been around a long time and I rarely see it > present in configured guests :-( > > > Regards, > Daniel
libvirt runs with -nodefaults, right? I'd argue pretty strongly -nodefaults shouldn't add optional devices anyway. So it's up to you guys, you can add it to VMs by default if you want to. > -- > |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| > |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| > |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
