On Thursday, 16 November 2017 16:44:24 CET Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 16:17 +0100, Pino Toscano wrote: > > On Thursday, 16 November 2017 14:56:32 CET Pavel Hrdina wrote: > > > How about we introduce another attribute/element that would specify the > > > exact model of the serial device and it would be optional, libvirt would > > > be able to choose the model if none is specified. > > > > Can you please provide an example of how it would look like? > > <serial type='pty'> > <target type='xxx-serial> > <model name='splc'/> > </target> > </serial> IMHO that looks a bit more convoluted than necessary. > > > I was no able to find anything about s390 and its sclp/sclplm consoles > > > but it's the same case. I would expect that both devices are connected > > > to the same BUS, we just need to find the BUS name to use it $BUS-serial > > > and have sclp/sclplm as models. > > > > There is no real bus for sclp/sclplm -- there is only an internal "bus" > > in QEMU, but it should not be exposed in upper layers (as it is only an > > implementation detail). > > There's probably some name, in some spec, somewhere :) Nope. > Or we could use 's390-serial', but that would be suboptimal. That is way too generic, and representing something which does not exist (unlike the current -serial ones). I still do not see the advantage of this, though. -- Pino Toscano
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
