"Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes: > On Sun, May 07, 2023 at 08:56:23PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote: >> Hi! >> >> In old good world ;), there was qemu which didn't require boot roms to be >> present >> for all devices for which bootrom file is defined, missing rom was just a >> warning. >> But this changed in 2014, 9 years ago, with this commit: >> >> commit 178e785fb4507ec3462dc772bbe08303416ece47 >> From: Marcel Apfelbaum <marce...@redhat.com> >> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 19:34:41 +0200 >> Subject: [PATCH] hw/pci: fixed error flow in pci_qdev_init >> >> Verify return code for pci_add_option_rom. >> >> where inability to load rom file started being treated as an error. >> Up until now I didn't even know about this change, until today when someone >> bugged >> me about non-working qemu on debian, due to missing network boot roms (this a >> packaging issue due to me being unaware of the above change). >> >> What is the reason to require boot roms to be present and throw an error if >> not? >> >> I'm about to revert that old change on debian, to make it just a warning >> instead >> of an error (the code is different now, but the same principle applies), - >> because >> I dislike dependencies which are useless 99.9% of the time and are trivial to >> install when actually needed. >> >> Thanks, >> >> /mjt >> > > I advise against it. > If you boot guest on a system with boot rom not installed you will not > be able to migrate to a system with boot rom installed. > why not? because we don't know how big to make the rom BAR.
For what it's worth: we know when property "romsize" is set. > And users will not discover until much much later after they have > painted themselves into a corner.
