From: Don Slutz <dslutz@verizon.com>
To: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>, Don Slutz <dslutz@verizon.com>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [BUGFIX][PATCH for 2.2 1/1] hw/i386/pc_piix.c: Also pass vmport=off for xenfv machine
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 10:24:15 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <546E079F.8030802@terremark.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141120151346.GJ3243@thinpad.lan.raisama.net>
On 11/20/14 10:13, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 02:08:08PM -0500, Don Slutz wrote:
>> On 11/19/14 13:08, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> On 19/11/2014 19:07, Don Slutz wrote:
>>>>> "-M pc -machine accel=xen" should work and, if that's what you want,
>>>>> disable the vmport device. I think this patch is wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> Paolo
>>>> Well, I also want "-M pc -machine accel=xen,vmport=on" to work.
>>> Right. So let's start by deciding what the desired semantics are for
>>> all six cases: -M pc/xenfv, -machine vmport=on/off/absent.
>>>
>>> Paolo
>> I get 12 cases (PCMachineState *pcms = PC_MACHINE(obj)):
> We have more cases, if we consider "-M pc-2.1" too.
>
> With this first patch (the one changing default_machine_opts), I expect
> to get the following results:
>
> -M pc
> pcms->vmport is true
> -M pc -machine vmport=on
> pcms->vmport is true
> -M pc -machine vmport=off
> pcms->vmport is false
> -M pc-2.1
> pcms->vmport is true
> -M pc-2.1 -machine vmport=on
> pcms->vmport is true
> (but it doesn't matter, QEMU 2.1 didn't have the vmport option)
> -M pc-2.1 -machine vmport=off
> pcms->vmport is false
> (but it doesn't matter, QEMU 2.1 didn't have the vmport option)
> -M xenfv
> pcms->vmport is false
> -M xenfv -machine vmport=on
> pcms->vmport is true
> -M xenfv -machine vmport=off
> pcms->vmport is false
>
> -M pc -machine accel=xen
> pcms->vmport is true
> -M pc -machine vmport=on,accel=xen
> pcms->vmport is true
> -M pc -machine vmport=off,accel=xen
> pcms->vmport is false
> -M pc-2.1 -machine accel=xen
> pcms->vmport is true **
> -M pc-2.1 -machine vmport=on,accel=xen
> pcms->vmport is true
> (but it doesn't matter, QEMU 2.1 didn't have the vmport option)
> -M pc-2.1 -machine vmport=off,accel=xen
> pcms->vmport is false
> (but it doesn't matter, QEMU 2.1 didn't have the vmport option)
> -M xenfv -machine accel=xen
> pcms->vmport is false
> -M xenfv -machine vmport=on,accel=xen
> pcms->vmport is true
> -M xenfv -machine vmport=off,accel=xen
> pcms->vmport is false
>
> I believe there's no consensus yet about the one marked with "**" above. It
> boils to the question: do we need to keep guest ABI stability when using
> "-M pc-2.1 -machine accel=xen"?
>
My answer is that for "**" vmport needs to be off. It looks like my
response:
> Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH for 2.2 1/1] hw/i386/pc_piix.c: Also pass
vmport=off for xenfv machine
> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 10:09:31 -0500
> From: Don Slutz <dslutz@terremark.com>
> To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Don Slutz
<dslutz@verizon.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Eduardo
Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
>
> On 11/20/14 01:02, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> > On 19/11/2014 20:08, Don Slutz wrote:
> >> -M pc -machine accel=xen
> >> pcms->vmport is false
> > I think this should be true. Any reason why not?
> >
> > Paolo
>
> Yes, QEMU will crash if xen is enabled and the guest tries to access the
> VMware port.
>
> (more on different thread).
>
> -Don Slutz
Was not seen before this.
-Don Slutz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-20 15:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-19 17:30 [Qemu-devel] [BUGFIX][PATCH for 2.2 1/1] hw/i386/pc_piix.c: Also pass vmport=off for xenfv machine Don Slutz
2014-11-19 17:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-19 18:07 ` Don Slutz
2014-11-19 18:08 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-19 19:08 ` Don Slutz
2014-11-19 19:15 ` Don Slutz
2014-11-19 19:30 ` Eduardo Habkost
2014-11-19 20:01 ` Don Slutz
2014-11-20 0:24 ` Eduardo Habkost
2014-11-20 0:49 ` Don Slutz
2014-11-20 6:02 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-11-20 15:09 ` Don Slutz
2014-11-20 15:13 ` Eduardo Habkost
2014-11-20 15:24 ` Don Slutz [this message]
2014-11-20 15:27 ` Eduardo Habkost
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=546E079F.8030802@terremark.com \
--to=dslutz@verizon.com \
--cc=aliguori@amazon.com \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=mjt@tls.msk.ru \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).