On Sun, 8 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 05:17:45PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
No - the option rom will always be executed. The purpose of placing
it in the BCV list is to order its execution with respect to other
BCVs so that if the legacy option rom hooks int13 it will
Hi,
> I'm not sure what a SCSI rom would do with a CD drive. My guess is
> that it wouldn't map it to a BIOS visible drive id at all, as there's
> no way to select an id with any assurance that it wont conflict with
> one chosen by the BIOS or another rom. If QEMU can simulate this (and
> some
On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 05:17:45PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 09:58:53AM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 10:31:05AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > Cool! What about non pnp roms that also register bcv? Should we use HD
> > > priority for those too
On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 09:58:53AM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 10:31:05AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 11:28:44AM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > > I downloaded 8xx_64.rom and tried the above command line.
> > > Interestingly, it will register a
On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 10:31:05AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 11:28:44AM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > I downloaded 8xx_64.rom and tried the above command line.
> > Interestingly, it will register a BEV for a CD drive - which confirms
> > my suspicion that it wont use a
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
No NIC:
-net none
=> No iPXE ROM (correct).
but with the previously listed config no iPXE ROM should be there. Saw this
is done through paravirtualization from Seabios/QEMU or KVM. So there
must be a bug
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 11:28:44AM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 10:00:56AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> > On Fri, 6 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > >I'm not sure what a SCSI rom would do with a CD drive. My guess is
> > >that it wouldn't map it to a BIOS visible
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
No NIC:
-net none
=> No iPXE ROM (correct).
but with the previously listed config no iPXE ROM should be there. Saw this
is done through paravirtualization from Seabios/QEMU or KVM. So there
must be a bug with the empty romfile options with net or dev
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 11:47:29PM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> >I downloaded 8xx_64.rom and tried the above command line.
> >Interestingly, it will register a BEV for a CD drive - which confirms
> >my suspicion that it wont use a BCV. Also interest
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 10:00:56AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
I'm not sure what a SCSI rom would do with a CD drive. My guess is
that it wouldn't map it to a BIOS visible drive id at all, as there's
no wa
On Sat, 7 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 09:35:55AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
[...]
5. Legacy option rom
6. DVD/CD [ata1-0: QEMU DVD-ROM ATAPI-4 DVD/CD]
7. iPXE (PCI 00:00.0)
But there is still the iPXE ROM there (I think I didn't see iPXE
because it is last one
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 10:00:56AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> >I'm not sure what a SCSI rom would do with a CD drive. My guess is
> >that it wouldn't map it to a BIOS visible drive id at all, as there's
> >no way to select an id with any assurance
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 09:35:55AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
[...]
> 5. Legacy option rom
> 6. DVD/CD [ata1-0: QEMU DVD-ROM ATAPI-4 DVD/CD]
> 7. iPXE (PCI 00:00.0)
>
> But there is still the iPXE ROM there (I think I didn't see iPXE
> because it is last one displayed and boot screen is fast
On Fri, 6 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
I'm not sure what a SCSI rom would do with a CD drive. My guess is
that it wouldn't map it to a BIOS visible drive id at all, as there's
no way to select an id with any assurance that it wont conflict with
one chosen by the BIOS or another rom. If QEMU
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 11:20:37AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:09:44AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
But as far as I remember therefore the option ROM registers through
BIOS for INT 19h booting. So Seabios should know it tha
On Fri, Jan 06, 2012 at 07:27:25AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 09:05:39PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> > SeaBIOS could probably fall back to the harddrive priority if it finds
> > a BCV without an explicit bootindex priority.
> The same option rom probably will register b
On 01/06/12 09:20, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 08:39:15AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
>>> BTW: I didn't get any answer to the following thread:
>>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-11/msg00602.html
>>
>> Od
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 08:39:15AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
BTW: I didn't get any answer to the following thread:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-11/msg00602.html
Odd - that email never made it to my inbox. Anyway, Gerd repo
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 09:05:39PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 11:20:37AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:09:44AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> > > But as far as I remember therefore the option ROM registers through
> > > BIOS for INT 19h boo
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 11:20:37AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:09:44AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> > But as far as I remember therefore the option ROM registers through
> > BIOS for INT 19h booting. So Seabios should know it that this is a
> > harddisk.
> It regist
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 08:39:15AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> BTW: I didn't get any answer to the following thread:
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-11/msg00602.html
Odd - that email never made it to my inbox. Anyway, Gerd reported a
similar issue to the SeaBIOS mailing
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 12:13:34PM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> >>qemu-system-x86_64: -device
> >>rtl8139,macaddr=1a:46:0b:ca:bc:7c,vlan=0,romfile=: Property
> >>'rtl8139.macaddr' not found
> >
> >Oops. It is mac=..., not macaddr=...
>
> Just for th
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
qemu-system-x86_64: -device
rtl8139,macaddr=1a:46:0b:ca:bc:7c,vlan=0,romfile=: Property
'rtl8139.macaddr' not found
Oops. It is mac=..., not macaddr=...
Just for the records, working config looks like:
/root/download/qemu/git/qemu-kvm/x86_64-softmmu/q
Hi,
> qemu-system-x86_64: -device
> rtl8139,macaddr=1a:46:0b:ca:bc:7c,vlan=0,romfile=: Property
> 'rtl8139.macaddr' not found
Oops. It is mac=..., not macaddr=...
cheers,
Gerd
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
On 01/05/12 10:24, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
Hi,
Better use a empty string as romfile argument, that will make the ROM
pci bar go away instead of creating one with an invalid rom.
Thnx. Works well by specifyi
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:56:23AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >boot option is deprecated in favor of bootindex. The later has much more
> >fine grained control of boot sequence. What if you have 5 SCSI
> >controllers? Even boot=c does not tell you mu
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
boot option is deprecated in favor of bootindex. The later has much more
fine grained control of boot sequence. What if you have 5 SCSI
controllers? Even boot=c does not tell you much if you have more then
one disk.
Ok, then this is a documentation issue
On 01/05/12 10:24, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
Better use a empty string as romfile argument, that will make the ROM
pci bar go away instead of creating one with an invalid rom.
>>>
>>> Thnx. Works well by specifying no romfile, that's th
Hi,
> But to get rid of this problem typical BIOSes have an option whether
> they prefer to BOOT from SCSI (with an option ROM) or
> from the other devices. Then the option ROM typically boots from the
> first registered device.
qemu+seabios have bootindex to address that issue. It was created
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:36:29AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:27:44AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> >>On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:09:44AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wro
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:27:44AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:09:44AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 09:23:02AM +
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:27:44AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:09:44AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> >>On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 09:23:02AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wro
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:09:44AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 09:23:02AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
On 01/04/12 19:02, Gerhard Wiesinge
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
Hi,
Better use a empty string as romfile argument, that will make the ROM
pci bar go away instead of creating one with an invalid rom.
Thnx. Works well by specifying no romfile, that's the trick. I had the
problem than otherwise devices were created.
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 10:09:44AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> >On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 09:23:02AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> >>On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> >>
> >>>On 01/04/12 19:02, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> Hello,
> >>>
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 09:23:02AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
On 01/04/12 19:02, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
Hello,
I'm having the following boot order problem using an SCSI option ROM:
Still boots the cd
Hi,
>> Better use a empty string as romfile argument, that will make the ROM
>> pci bar go away instead of creating one with an invalid rom.
>
> Thnx. Works well by specifying no romfile, that's the trick. I had the
> problem than otherwise devices were created. But I'm still getting the
> foll
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 09:23:02AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>
> >On 01/04/12 19:02, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>I'm having the following boot order problem using an SCSI option ROM:
> >>
> >
> >>Still boots the cdrom instead of har
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
On 01/04/12 19:02, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
Hello,
I'm having the following boot order problem using an SCSI option ROM:
Still boots the cdrom instead of harddisk. So it is impossible to have a
bootable CDROM in the VM without booting from it.
-op
On 01/04/12 19:02, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm having the following boot order problem using an SCSI option ROM:
>
> Still boots the cdrom instead of harddisk. So it is impossible to have a
> bootable CDROM in the VM without booting from it.
-option-rom romfile=/root/roms/8xx_64.r
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 07:02:34PM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm having the following boot order problem using an SCSI option ROM:
>
> Command line:
> /root/download/qemu/git/qemu-kvm/x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64
> -drive file=1.img,media=disk,if=scsi,bus=0,unit=0
> -drive
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 07:02:34PM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
There is a "bootindex" option that can be passed to the "-device"
parameter of QEMU. This option give more fine grained control of boot
order.
However, the default should have been to b
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 07:02:34PM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm having the following boot order problem using an SCSI option ROM:
>
> Command line:
> /root/download/qemu/git/qemu-kvm/x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64
> -drive file=1.img,media=disk,if=scsi,bus=0,unit=0
> -drive
On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:06:19 +0300
Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 04:07:12PM +0900, Minoru Usui wrote:
> > Hi, Gleb
> >
> > Thank you for your reply.
> >
> > On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:30:49 +0300
> > Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 09:51:16AM +0900, Minoru Us
On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:09:31 +0300
Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 04:44:58PM +0900, Minoru Usui wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:30:49 +0300
> > Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >
> [skip]
>
> > I tested another one about case on RHEL6.1, and I also faced
> > another problem.
> >
> > V
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 04:44:58PM +0900, Minoru Usui wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:30:49 +0300
> Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
[skip]
> I tested another one about case on RHEL6.1, and I also faced
> another problem.
>
> VM has two virtio HDD. HDD1 is installed RHEL6.1, HDD2 is empty.
> I specified
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 04:07:12PM +0900, Minoru Usui wrote:
> Hi, Gleb
>
> Thank you for your reply.
>
> On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:30:49 +0300
> Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 09:51:16AM +0900, Minoru Usui wrote:
> > > Hi, everyone
> > >
> > > I'm in trouble about boot order o
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:30:49 +0300
Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 09:51:16AM +0900, Minoru Usui wrote:
> > Hi, everyone
> >
> > I'm in trouble about boot order of VM.
> > If anyone know cause of this problem, please let me know.
> >
> The cause of the "problem" is the design. boo
Hi, Gleb
Thank you for your reply.
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:30:49 +0300
Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 09:51:16AM +0900, Minoru Usui wrote:
> > Hi, everyone
> >
> > I'm in trouble about boot order of VM.
> > If anyone know cause of this problem, please let me know.
> >
> The caus
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 09:51:16AM +0900, Minoru Usui wrote:
> Hi, everyone
>
> I'm in trouble about boot order of VM.
> If anyone know cause of this problem, please let me know.
>
The cause of the "problem" is the design. booindex and -boot only
modifies the order in which bios will search for b
50 matches
Mail list logo
