On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 11:08:34AM -0600, Jim Fehlig wrote: > On 10/17/18 12:59 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 08:46:19AM -0600, Jim Fehlig wrote: > > > I had some couch time at the start of the weekend and was finally able to > > > try using this series with virt-install. As it turns out, reporting > > > duplicate <guest> blocks for <os_type> 'xen' is not quite right. Instead we > > > will want to report the additional <machine> under the existing 'xen' > > > <guest> blocks. > > > > Is that virt-install limitation? In that case, IMO virt-install should > > be fixed, instead of changing capabilities xml to match its limitations. > > Perhaps it is a virt-install limitation, but my suggestion was based more on > how the qemu driver reports the different machines > > <guest> > <os_type>hvm</os_type> > <arch name='x86_64'> > <wordsize>64</wordsize> > <emulator>/usr/bin/qemu-system-x86_64</emulator> > <machine maxCpus='255'>pc-i440fx-3.0</machine> > <machine maxCpus='288'>pc-q35-3.0</machine> > ... > </arch> > </guest> > > Compare that with reporting PV and PVH in different <guest> blocks, where > the <os_type> and <arch> are the same. It seems confusing from a consumers > POV > > <guest> > <os_type>xen</os_type> > <arch name='x86_64'> > <wordsize>64</wordsize> > <emulator>/usr/bin/qemu-system-x86_64</emulator> > <machine>xenpv</machine> > </arch> > </guest> > > <guest> > <os_type>xen</os_type> > <arch name='x86_64'> > <wordsize>64</wordsize> > <emulator>/usr/bin/qemu-system-x86_64</emulator> > <machine>xenpvh</machine> > </arch> > </guest> > > How should a consumer interpret that? Is the machine for os_type=xen, > arch=x86_64 a xenpv or a xenpvh? I don't see a problem - each guest block represent set of possible configurations. Given the current structure, you could also ask "is the os_type for arch=x86_64 a xen or a hvm?". Both are valid, with possibly different set of features available. And the same goes for xenpv and xenpvh machines. Actually, I see qemu had similar problem as we have now with some features being specific to some machine value - maxCpus. And as solution, it was put in machine's attributes. But I think this approach is short-sighted. -- Best Regards, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki Invisible Things Lab A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
