On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 09:32:21AM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote: > On 3/22/23 06:42, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote: > > On 3/22/23 06:25, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 06:10:18AM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote: > > > > + if (loader->type != VIR_DOMAIN_LOADER_TYPE_NONE || > > > > + (loader->type == VIR_DOMAIN_LOADER_TYPE_NONE && !loader->path)) > > > > virBufferAsprintf(&loaderAttrBuf, " type='%s'", > > > > virDomainLoaderTypeToString(loader->type)); > > > > > > VIR_DOMAIN_LOADER_TYPE_NONE is a constant we're already using internally > > > to track when the user has not given any <loader> element at all. > > > > > > It is not a good idea to overload for this for the user explicitly > > > requesting a config. > > > > Makes sense. Any name suggestions for this new constant? > > > > VIR_DOMAIN_LOADER_TYPE_SKIP is the first thing that comes to mind. If we want to > > keep it consistent we should also change this new type to <loader type='skip'/> > > as well. > > VIR_DOMAIN_LOADER_TYPE_OTHER seems more appropriate to indicate that the firmware > will be loaded not by QEMU, but other means (e.g. kernel). I'm not sure we really need a new loader type. Can't we just add '-bios none' unconditionally on RISC-V when a loader path or a kernel path have been provided, either manually or via autoselection? -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
