Kevin Wolf <kwolf@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Am 28.01.2019 um 09:50 hat Peter Krempa geschrieben: [...] >> 2) Is actually using 'scsi-cd'/'scsi-hd' the better option than >> 'scsi-disk'? > > Yes, scsi-disk is a legacy device. Maybe we should formally deprecate > it. There's an internal use in scsi_bus_legacy_add_drive(), which in turn powers two legacy features: 1. -drive if=scsi Creates scsi-disk frontends. Only works with onboard HBAs since commit 14545097267, v2.12.0. 2. -device usb-storage Bad magic: usb-storage pretends to be a block device, but it's really a SCSI bus that can serve only a single device, which it creates automatically. If we deprecate scsi-disk, we should deprecate these, too. Can't say whether that's practical right now. >> 3) Since upstream libvirt supports qemu-1.5 and newer and 'scsi-cd' is >> already supported there, can we assume that all newer versions support >> it? (Basically the question is whether it can be compiled out by >> upstream means). > > I think so. Compiling out scsi-hd or scsi-cd, but not scsi-disk would be silly. All three devices are in scsi-disk.c. You'd have to hack that up to be silly. -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
