From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:44825) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RVjdK-0001Ad-5I for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 07:51:35 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RVjdE-0004qY-01 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 07:51:30 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60432) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RVjdD-0004qS-PJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 30 Nov 2011 07:51:23 -0500 Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 12:51:23 +0000 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Message-ID: <20111130125123.GE28621@redhat.com> References: <20111130121142.GA14986@arachsys.com> <20111130122030.GW28621@redhat.com> <20111130124256.GB14986@arachsys.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111130124256.GB14986@arachsys.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Using AHCI drives in qemu Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Chris Webb Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 12:42:56PM +0000, Chris Webb wrote: > Thanks for the swift reply! > > "Daniel P. Berrange" writes: > > > Using -drive with an if=XXX which is anything other than 'none' is the > > deprecated / legacy syntax. The way libvirt does AHCI is to use the more > > verbose/modern syntax: > > > > -device ahci,id=ahci0 > > -drive if=none,file=/var/lib/libvirt/images/test/disk0.raw,format=raw,id=drive-sata0-0-0 > > -device ide-drive,bus=ahci0.0,drive=drive-sata0-0-0,id=sata0-0-0 > > Gosh, this is incredibly verbose for normal command line use. Whilst I can > see it's nice to have fine control over the detail (and bus/device ids) when > you need it, having to write out a command line of that length just to > attach a drive is a real pity. > > I could cook up a patch to do something sane with -drive if=ahci as a more > manageable command-line alternative, but is there any chance of this being > accepted if that you're describing the compact syntax as deprecated? I'm fairly sure such a patch would still be accepted. Regards, 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 :|