On Fri, 2018-08-17 at 11:43 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 12:35:11PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > If we decide we want to explicitly spell out the options instead > > of relying on QEMU changing behavior based on the slot type, which > > is probably a good idea anyway, I think we should have > > > > virtio-0.9 => disable-legacy=no,disable-modern=no > > virtio-1.0 => disable-legacy=yes,disable-modern=no > > > > There's basically no reason to have a device legacy-only rather > > than transitional, and spelling out both options instead of only > > one of them just seems more robust. > > From a testing POV it is desirable to be able to have legacy-only. > There is also possibility that guest OS impl 1.0 in a buggy manner, > so forcing legacy only is desirable. > > The existing device still already provides a transitional option > on i440fx, and on Q35 if you do explicit placement in a PCI slot. > So I don't think there's a good reason to have a second transitional > device type, especially if we're naming it virtio-0.9, it is rather > misleading if it would be in fact able to run virtio-1.0 mode. Sounds reasonable. -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
