On 10/03/2020 13:18, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 01:05:02PM +0200, Liran Alon wrote:
On 10/03/2020 11:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 01:54:01AM +0200, Liran Alon wrote:
Instead of hard-coding the VMX version, make it a VMPORT object property.
This would allow user to control it's value via "-global vmport.vmx-version=X".
Reviewed-by: Nikita Leshenko <nikita.leshche...@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Liran Alon <liran.a...@oracle.com>
More detail on why this is useful?
It's more useful than returning a hard-coded "6" as the vmx-version...
Maybe default should be 6 (a bit of explanation why 6 could be nice).
The default is indeed defined as 6. As it was before this patch.
There is not much to explain besides the fact that recent VMware
products returns 6 here.
I don't recall any mapping between the returned version here and the
supported set of VMPort commands. There is a separate mechanism (which
we implement in another patch) to signal that a command is unsupported /
failed.
The term "vmx-version" refers to the version of the Userspace-VMM of
VMware which is called (confusingly) "vmx".
We have used it to preserve compatibility for some VMware guests that we run
as-is on top of QEMU/KVM which expects specific vmx-version or else they
fail to run properly.
-Liran
Any detail on which guest it is?
I will need to dig in production history to find it... They are usually
proprietary appliances specially made to run as VMware VMs.
Pretending to be a very advanced version has its pitfalls if we
then don't behave the way vmware does, right?
In all those cases, we have taken the version number backwards, not forward.
Figuring out the version number is I suspect a bit much to ask of users.
Most users will indeed not need to touch this. This is for advanced
users, such as Ravello.
We usually figured this out by reverse-engineering the failed guest
and/or examining the original VMware environment it used to run on.
-Liran
