On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 09:58 -0400, Laine Stump wrote: > On 05/18/2016 07:53 AM, Cole Robinson wrote: > > > > Kind of. Prior to patch #2, the test suite output was correct (no addresses), > > it's what we were returning via domxml-from-native. After patch #2, the test > > suite output was wrong for all real world usage; it didn't change because it > > was only hitting a !QEMU_CAPS_DEVICE code path > > > > So the potentially contentious bit is that patch #2 changes domxml-from-native > > output to contain addresses, however that's exactly the same result that will > > happen when the XML would eventually be defined anyways, so it's effectively > > the same result as pre-patch #2 anyways. If we think of domxml-from-native as > > telling the user 'this is exactly what libvirt thinks that command line is' > > then we are now giving more accurate results > > > > Let me know if that still warrants the ACK > > My opinion is that this is a change for the better. While it is true > that this could lead to XML that potentially shows different PCI > addresses than what would have been auto-assigned by qemu when presented > with the original commandline, it *is* showing the addresses that would > be auto-allocated by libvirt if you had fed the "un-addressified" XML to > libvirt - so at least the user will get a warning rather than being > surprised at runtime. And it's not as if the output of > domxml-from-native has ever produced anything even close to the correct > XML in any real world situation. (dreadkopp in public #virt pastebin'ed > an example last night - 90% of it was translated directly into > <qemu:arg> elements). After reading Cole's explanation, I tend to agree. So I guess we can go ahead and merge this, as well as 5/4 :) -- Andrea Bolognani Software Engineer - Virtualization Team -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list