From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NKDhk-000547-Nk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:23:24 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NKDhg-00050k-Rd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:23:24 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39912 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NKDhg-00050V-KW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:23:20 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:23368) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NKDhg-0001YJ-0C for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 11:23:20 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:20:22 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: qdev property bug? Message-ID: <20091214162021.GA5807@redhat.com> References: <20091214094406.GB32140@redhat.com> <4B261082.4030806@redhat.com> <20091214105912.GA32355@redhat.com> <1913984B-EF3F-4974-830A-DF97B8410AA6@suse.de> <20091214132423.GB973@redhat.com> <4B263F23.2090601@suse.de> <4B2647AF.1030605@codemonkey.ws> <20091214141143.GA1360@redhat.com> <20091214141341.GB1360@redhat.com> <4B264AF1.6060802@codemonkey.ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B264AF1.6060802@codemonkey.ws> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: "glommer@redhat.com" , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Alexander Graf , Kevin O'Connor , Gerd Hoffmann , Sebastian Herbszt On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 08:25:53AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> >> Further, we should error out when device is added. >> Doing this during boot is way too late, management >> won't be able to understand such errors and >> won't be able to recover. >> > > I don't quite understand this. > > In 0.11, we never loaded option roms unless a user specified -boot n. > If a user specified -boot n and used more than one nic type, I'm fairly > certain it would error out during start up because it would run out of > option rom space. Maybe it required three types of nics, but the point > still remains. > > In 0.12, we always load the option rom for a PCI device. An easy > solution here would be to just gracefully handle the case where we ran > out of option rom space and (silently) stop loading additional roms. > With respect to -boot n, it makes the behavior buggy (you cannot boot > from the second nic) but my original point is that that is not a > regression from 0.11. Sorry, I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you suggested handling it with exit(1) or something like that. Yes, this hack will work I think, unless we want to go back to 0.11 behaviour. > For 0.13, we should probably allow a user to suppress option rom loading > for a given PCI device. The limited space is a pretty good > justification for that. > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > >>> -- >>> MST >>>