* [Qemu-devel] Is this an invalid combination?
@ 2011-02-15 20:07 Bruce Rogers
2011-02-15 20:21 ` Anthony Liguori
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Rogers @ 2011-02-15 20:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: qemu-devel
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.
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] Is this an invalid combination?
2011-02-15 20:07 [Qemu-devel] Is this an invalid combination? Bruce Rogers
@ 2011-02-15 20:21 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-02-15 20:28 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-02-15 20:28 ` Bruce Rogers
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Anthony Liguori @ 2011-02-15 20:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Rogers; +Cc: qemu-devel, Gleb Natapov
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?
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
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] Is this an invalid combination?
2011-02-15 20:21 ` Anthony Liguori
@ 2011-02-15 20:28 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-02-15 20:30 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-02-15 20:28 ` Bruce Rogers
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gleb Natapov @ 2011-02-15 20:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Anthony Liguori; +Cc: qemu-devel, Bruce Rogers
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.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] Is this an invalid combination?
2011-02-15 20:28 ` Gleb Natapov
@ 2011-02-15 20:30 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-02-15 20:32 ` Bruce Rogers
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gleb Natapov @ 2011-02-15 20:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Anthony Liguori; +Cc: qemu-devel, Bruce Rogers
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 10:28:08PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> 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
Ah the second one is linux loader.
> 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.
--
Gleb.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] Is this an invalid combination?
2011-02-15 20:30 ` Gleb Natapov
@ 2011-02-15 20:32 ` Bruce Rogers
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Rogers @ 2011-02-15 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Anthony Liguori, Gleb Natapov; +Cc: qemu-devel
>>> On 2/15/2011 at 01:30 PM, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 10:28:08PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> 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
> Ah the second one is linux loader.
>
>> 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.
>
> --
> Gleb.
The other one is linuxboot.bin.
Thanks for the clarification.
Bruce
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Qemu-devel] Is this an invalid combination?
2011-02-15 20:21 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-02-15 20:28 ` Gleb Natapov
@ 2011-02-15 20:28 ` Bruce Rogers
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Rogers @ 2011-02-15 20:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Anthony Liguori; +Cc: qemu-devel, Gleb Natapov
>>> On 2/15/2011 at 01:21 PM, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> 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?
>
> 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
>>
>>
>>
Yeah, I should have pointed out that this was using qemu-kvm.
Bruce
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-02-15 20:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-02-15 20:07 [Qemu-devel] Is this an invalid combination? Bruce Rogers
2011-02-15 20:21 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-02-15 20:28 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-02-15 20:30 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-02-15 20:32 ` Bruce Rogers
2011-02-15 20:28 ` Bruce Rogers
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).