On 9/10/19 8:56 PM, Cole Robinson wrote:
On 7/30/19 12:11 PM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:Currently the RPM spec doesn't add the 'secboot'-variant OVMF binaries (an unintentional omission, checking with Cole on #virt, OFTC) for 'x86_64' and 'ia32'. Add them. This way, getDomainCapabilities() will report all the OVMF binaries that are present on the system. E.g. on Fedora 29, if you only have the edk2-ovmf-20190308stable-1.fc29.noarch package installed, then running `virsh domcapabilities` will enumerate _both_ the OVMF binaries (instead of just the OVMF_CODE.fd): $> virsh getdomcapabilities ... <loader supported='yes'> <value>/usr/share/edk2/ovmf/OVMF_CODE.fd</value> <value>/usr/share/edk2/ovmf/OVMF_CODE.secboot.fd</value> ... ( Learnt this from a discussion with Michal Privoznik in this bug, comment#2: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1733940 -- RFE: Report firmware (FW) paths in domainCapabilities based on FW descriptor files ) Signed-off-by: Kashyap Chamarthy <kchamart@xxxxxxxxxx> --- I only did a cursory check on if I missed to add any other valid paths for other architectures. ---For the change: Reviewed-by: Cole Robinson <crobinso@xxxxxxxxxx> But I'm not sure how much we care now that firmware.repo is in the mix. I'll leave it up to Michal whether to apply
The only concern I had with this patch is that we will start putting "*.secboot.fd" images into domcaps XML even if secboot might not be available for given combination of arguments (machine type + arch). However, after my series gets merged we will report only those FW image paths that we found FW descriptors for and this will be used only as a fallback:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2019-August/msg00109.html So after all, ACK from me too. And pushed. Michal -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
