On 31/01/19 10:41, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On 31/01/19 09:40, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>>> Maybe we should just add pflash block properties to the machine? And >>>> then it can create the devices if the properties are set to a non-empty >>>> value. >>> What exactly do you have in mind? Something like >>> >>> -machine q35,ovmf-code=OVMF-CODE-NODE,ovmf-data=OVMF-DATA-NODE >>> >>> where OVMF-CODE-NODE and OVMF-DATA-NODE are block backend node names, >>> i.e. >>> >>> -blockdev file,node-name=OVMF-CODE-NODE,read-only=on,filename=/usr/share/edk2/ovmf/OVMF_CODE.fd >>> -blockdev file,node-name=OVMF-DATA-NODE,read-only=on,filename=... >> >> Yes, though I would call it pflash0 and pflash1. > > Digression... should we put traditional BIOS in flash as well? Only for > new machine types, obviously. The blocker was that very old KVM didn't support ROMD memory regions. Now on one hand we don't support those old kernel versions anymore; on the other hand we have HAX and WHPX that do not support ROMD at all. Paolo -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
