On 17/01/18 09:34, David Gibson wrote: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 03:46:20PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: >> On Wed, 2018-01-17 at 00:54 +1100, David Gibson wrote: >>>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me like there's no way >>>> to figure out through QMP whether these new machine options can be >>>> used for a given QEMU binary. >>> >>> Uh, I don't think so. These are machine options like any other (just >>> constructed a bit differently). So they'll appear in qemu -machine >>> pseries,? and I believe that info can also be retrieved with QMP. >> >> Yes, they will indeed show up in the output of -machine pseries,? >> but there's AFAICT no way to retrieve them via QMP. > > Really!? I thought introspecting object properties was QMP's bread > and butter.
On a guest started with '-S':
{"execute": "qom-list", "arguments": {"path": "/machine"}}
returns:
{ 'return': [ {'name': 'graphics', 'type': 'bool'},
{'name': 'phandle-start', 'type': 'int'},
{'name': 'dump-guest-core', 'type': 'bool'},
{'name': 'kernel-irqchip', 'type': 'OnOffSplit'},
{'name': 'accel', 'type': 'string'},
{'name': 'append', 'type': 'string'},
{'name': 'dumpdtb', 'type': 'string'},
{'name': 'igd-passthru', 'type': 'bool'},
{'name': 'dt-compatible', 'type': 'string'},
{'name': 'kernel', 'type': 'string'},
{'name': 'usb', 'type': 'bool'},
{'name': 'suppress-vmdesc', 'type': 'bool'},
{'name': 'dtb', 'type': 'string'},
{'name': 'firmware', 'type': 'string'},
{'name': 'mem-merge', 'type': 'bool'},
{'name': 'initrd', 'type': 'string'},
{'name': 'enforce-config-section', 'type': 'bool'},
{'name': 'kvm-shadow-mem', 'type': 'int'},
{'name': 'cap-dfp', 'type': 'bool'},
{'name': 'cap-htm', 'type': 'bool'},
{'name': 'cap-vsx', 'type': 'bool'},
{'name': 'vfio-no-msix-emulation', 'type': 'bool'},
{'name': 'kvm-type', 'type': 'string'},
{'name': 'max-cpu-compat', 'type': 'string'},
{ 'name': 'dr-connector[268435480]',
'type': 'child<spapr-drc-cpu>'},
{'name': 'peripheral', 'type': 'child<container>'},
{ 'name': 'dr-connector[268435472]',
'type': 'child<spapr-drc-cpu>'},
{'name': 'modern-hotplug-events', 'type': 'bool'},
{ 'name': 'dr-connector[268435464]',
'type': 'child<spapr-drc-cpu>'},
{ 'name': 'dr-connector[268435456]',
'type': 'child<spapr-drc-cpu>'},
{'name': 'peripheral-anon', 'type': 'child<container>'},
{'name': 'ics', 'type': 'child<icskvm>'},
{'name': 'vsmt', 'type': 'uint32'},
{'name': 'type', 'type': 'string'},
{'name': 'rtc-time', 'type': 'struct tm'},
{'name': 'unattached', 'type': 'child<container>'},
{'name': 'rtc', 'type': 'child<spapr-rtc>'},
{'name': 'resize-hpt', 'type': 'string'}]}
but still requires a running qemu, yes.
>
>> And libvirt
>> can't afford to spawn a QEMU process for each machine type
>> implemented by each QEMU binary installed on the system just to
>> figure out what properties they support; in fact, we've been
>> pushing away from that approach - which was used initially - for
>> years and we're now at the point where we only fall back to it
>> for positively ancient QEMU versions. So the information needs
>> to be available through QMP for libvirt to consume it.
>
> Right, I'm not arguing with that. It's just that I thought that
> standard QOM properties on QOM objects (the machine in this case) met
> the criteria.
>
--
Alexey
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
