On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 11:03:46AM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 03:44:39PM +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 10:35:38AM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 02:12:32PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 10:06:46AM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > > > (CCing libvir-list) > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 09:43:00AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 09:27:46AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Add to that shortcuts like -cdrom > > > > > > > > > stop working, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe is fixable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Already fixed for ages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I see marking Q35 as the default machine a first step. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe the better option is to go the arm route: Just don't define a > > > > > > > default, so users have to specify pc or q35. That will make them notice > > > > > > > there is a world beside 'pc', and we also avoid breaking things > > > > > > > silently. > > > > > > > > > > > > If QEMU removes the default, then libvirt will have to hardcode > > > > > > 'pc' as the default to maintain back compatibility, so I don't > > > > > > think that ends up as a net win > > > > > > > > > > Is there an actual promise to never change the default > > > > > machine-type documented in the libvirt API, or is this just fear > > > > > of breaking existing code? > > > > > > > > The risk of breaking things that currently work. Some of the things > > > > discussed here that risk breaking users if QEMU changes the default, > > > > have the same risk if libvirt changes the default. > > > > > > > > eg old OS versions that only work with PC, or more commonly pre-existing > > > > cloud disk images that were built against PC can't be assumed to just > > > > work against q35, even if the OS in the image supports it. > > > > > > > > If we want to get q35 broadly used for modern OS, then IMHO the best > > > > option is to record that metadata in libosinfo, as ew do for other > > > > virtual hardware preferences. That doesn't fix the problem of disk > > > > images that might not transparently boot between pc/q35, but at least > > > > avoids breaking OS that don't support q35 at all. > > > > > > This leads to a more general question: sometimes the defaults > > > chosen by libvirt are obsolete or broken, and we might want to > > > change them. > > > > > > Is there a process for changing defaults in libvirt, or libvirt > > > is bound by past decisions forever? > > > > If the default was always recorded in the domain XML it is safe to > > change it because it will not affect already existing domains or > > migration but if the default is not recorded in the domain XML there > > needs to be a lot of compatibility code. > > That's the opposite of what Daniel said above, isn't it? The > machine-type is always recorded in the domain XML, but it's still > considered unsafe to change. It's not opposite. The thing is that some of the defaults are not that easy change for other reasons, not from libvirt POV or because of ABI stability. In general yes, it is possible to change it but in some cases it might not be good idea, one example could be the machine time. Changing default machine time affects the whole guest and may break a lot of use-cases but changing some default device model if the current default is obsolete and most of the OSes supports the new one should be safe. Pavel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
