From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=33944 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PpRVO-0006mj-Sp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:28:15 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1PpRVN-0007bN-M2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:28:14 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22576)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1PpRVN-0007b8-FR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:28:13 -0500
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:28:08 +0200
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Is this an invalid combination?
Message-ID: <20110215202808.GA12069@redhat.com>
References: <4D5A7A8D02000048000AA029@novprvoes0310.provo.novell.com>
	<4D5AE055.1090102@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4D5AE055.1090102@codemonkey.ws>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Bruce Rogers <brogers@novell.com>

On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 02:21:41PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 02/15/2011 02:07 PM, Bruce Rogers wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >We just noticed an issue flagged by a libvirt based test.  This same command line didn't used to fail, and I wanted to be sure that this is behaving as intended.
> >
> >When the following command line is used on the current qemu version:
> >
> >x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 -kernel /boot/vmlinuz -drive file=~/disk0.raw,if=none,id=foo,boot=on -device virtio-blk-pci,drive=foo
> >
> >We get the following error reported:
> >Two devices with same boot index 0
> >
> >Previous versions of qemu did not flag this as an error condition.
> 
> Upstream QEMU does not have a boolean boot flag although I guess we
> ignore it in -drive which sucks :-/
> 
> In upstream QEMU, the BIOS can boot just fine from a virtio device.
> What you're seeing is that we've apparently overloaded the boot flag
> in upstream qemu to mean boot index.
> 
> Gleb, what's the right invocation here?
> 
Just drop boot=on. Qemu-kvm registers extboot and some other bootrom
(which one?) with the same boot index. This should be fixed, but
dropping boot=on is the right solution in any case. Actually I want to
remove extboot from qemu-kvm at all. It will not make it upstream
anyway.


> Regards,
> 
> ANthony Liguori
> 
> >I can see that we are indicating two different boot sources here, so I would guess the command line is invalid, but wanted to be sure.
> >
> >Bruce
> >
> >

--
			Gleb.