On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 09:47:27PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 03/08/18 16:47, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 12:10:30PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote: [...] > >> For OVMF (x86), I guess the initial set of properties should come from > >> the "-D FOO[=BAR]" build flags that OVMF currently supports. (The list > >> might grow or change incompatibly over time, so this is just a raw > >> starter idea.) > > > > I really don't want to see us using firmware implementation specific > > property names in these files. It means libvirt will require knowledge > > of what each different firmware's property names mean. > > > > We need to have some core standardized set of property names that can > > be provided by any firmware implementation using the same terminology. > > > > If we want to /also/ provide some extra firmeware-specific property > > names that would be ok for informative purposes, but when lbivirt is > > picking which firmware file to use, it would only ever look at the > > standardized property names/values. > > This is a reasonable requirement from the libvirt side. > > Unfortunately (or not), it requires someone (or a tight group of people) > to collect the features of all virtual firmwares in existence, and > extract a common set of properties that maps back to each firmware one > way or another. Hmm, if people consider the above worthwhile (no clue how much time & investigation it takes to arrive at a common set of properties) maybe slowly we should start collecting such a page? From a quick look up, list of open source firmware implementations I found so (besides OVMF & ArmVirt): - OpenBIOS - SmartFirmware - OpenBoot - CoreBoot - U-Boot - SLOF - ... Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenBIOS I notice you said "virtual firmwares". I couldn't find such a list from my look up. Hmm, I also wonder if the "arriving at a common set of properties across existing virtual firmwares" is an absolute blocker. > This is not unusual (basically this is how all standards > bodies work that intend to codify existing practice), it just needs a > bunch of work and coordination. We'll have to maintain a registry. > > Personally I can't comment on anything else than OVMF and the ArmVirt > firmwares. > > Thanks, > Laszlo -- /kashyap -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
