From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37611)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <berrange@redhat.com>) id 1Yvkt4-00033s-Ar
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 May 2015 07:13:11 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <berrange@redhat.com>) id 1Yvkt0-0000KP-TO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 May 2015 07:13:10 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33522)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <berrange@redhat.com>) id 1Yvkt0-0000KD-M1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 22 May 2015 07:13:06 -0400
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 12:12:59 +0100
From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20150522111259.GG14428@redhat.com>
References: <555DE2EF.1000509@redhat.com> <20150522110136.GF14428@redhat.com>
	<CAFEAcA8HCTLYdehGq+UoUxYO8S=g-Cqmv4PacUpXHAmkppxodA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA8HCTLYdehGq+UoUxYO8S=g-Cqmv4PacUpXHAmkppxodA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Announcing qboot, a minimal x86 firmware for QEMU
Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:04:54PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 22 May 2015 at 12:01, Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On the QEMU side of things I wonder if there is scope for taking AArch64's
> > 'virt' machine type concept and duplicating it on all architectures.
> 
> Experience suggests that holding the line on "minimal" is really
> quite tricky, though -- there's always one more thing that
> somebody really wants to add...

Yep, it is hard saying no - but I'd think as long as it was possible to add
the extra features using -device, it ought to be practical to keep a "virt"
machine types "-nodefaults -nodefconfig" base setup pretty minimal. In
particular I don't see why we need to have a SATA controller and ISA/LPC
bridge in every virt machine - root PCI bus only should be possible, as you
can provide disks via virtio-blk or virtio-scsi and serial, parallel, mouse,
floppy via PCI devices and/or by adding a USB bus in the cases where you
really need one.

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 :|