On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 04:09:00PM +0800, Hu Tao wrote: > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 06:15:27AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote: > > On 11/27/2013 03:39 AM, Peter Krempa wrote: > > > On 11/27/13 09:41, Hu Tao wrote: > > >> qemu removes the builtin pvpanic device for all qemu versions since 1.7, > > >> in order to support <on_crash>, '-device pvpanic' has to be added to > > >> qemu command line. > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Hu Tao <hutao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > >> --- > > > > > I remember discussions saying that it's NOT a good idea to enable this > > > stuff always. As a result, this device is not being added by qemu as you > > > described above. Shouldn't we only add this if the user enables > > > <on_crash> actions? > > > > You are precisely right; we MUST add a new entry under <devices> in the > > <domain> XML before enabling this device. > > Is a entry under <devices> for pvpanic still needed? What I thought is > that it is natural to enable pvpanic when user enables <on_crash>, > he/she even has no need to know about pvpanic. No, the <on_crash> elements are *soley* about setting policy. They must never have any impact on hardware visibility. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list