On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 08:52:45AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi, > > > > [*] Open question: Who, between QEMU and libvirt, should define the said > > > firmware metadata format and file? > > > > IMHO QEMU should be defining the format, because the file will contain > > info about certain QEMU features associated with the firmware (eg smm). > > Also there are potentially other non-libvirt mgmt apps that spawn QEMU > > which would like this info (eg libguestfs), so having libvirt define the > > format is inappropriate. > > > > I'd suggest we just need something in docs/specs/firmware-metadata.rst > > for QEMU source tree. > > > > Potentially QEMU could even use the metadata files itself for finding > > the default firmeware images, instead of compiling this info into its > > binaries. I wouldn't suggest we need todo that right away, but bear it > > in mind as a potential use case. > > With qemu using this itself in mind it probably makes sense to specify > this as qapi schema. That'll simplify parsing and using these files in > qemu, and possibly simplifies things on the libvirt side too. Yeah, FWIW, I too find using the QAPI schema for the metadata file format more appealing (rather than a separate file format). And libvirt already has infrastructure to handle QAPI. -- /kashyap -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
