On Sep 1, 2013, at 12:28 , Roy Golan <rgo...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 08/30/2013 07:33 PM, Vitor de Lima wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> Recently the changes #18150, #18677 and #17885 were submitted in order to >> avoid the selection of display protocols and virtual video cards that are >> incompatible with the PPC64 architecture and to map the VNC protocol with >> the standard VGA virtual device, since the Cirrus Logic device is not >> supported in the PPC64 architecture. I would like some feedback about that. >> >> So far, these changes use an existing parameter in the osinfo (called >> "spiceSupport") to validate if the selected operating system supports SPICE >> and hide it in the frontend in case it doesn't. They also change the default >> virtual video card for each display protocol according to new properties in >> the osinfo, e.g.: >> >> os.other.spiceSupport.value = true >> os.other.devices.vnc.vmDeviceType.value = cirrus >> os.other.devices.qxl.vmDeviceType.value = qxl >> os.other_ppc64.spiceSupport.value = false >> os.other_ppc64.devices.vnc.vmDeviceType.value = vga >> (This maps the qxl protocol into the qxl device and the VNC protocol into >> the cirrus device in the x86_64 arch, and the VNC protocol into the VGA >> device in the PPC64) >> >> However, this still has some limitations, such as: >> >> * It doesn't allow the user to choose between the different virtual devices >> that exist and can be used in the VNC protocol (such as the QXL and VMware >> VGA) >> * The syntax is ugly. As suggested in the code reviews, it could be a list >> of supported protocols, e.g.: >> os.other.displayProtocols = vnc, spice > +1 list style is cleaner, expressive and easy to use. spiceSupport was just > the way to convert the old code to the osinfo style. > > protocol-device mapping can be achieved by pairing them literally - > > os.other.displayProtocols.value = vnc/cirrus, spice/qxl > > which reads VNC over cirrus device, SPICE over qxl device. > > and for ppc64: > > os.other_ppc64.displayProtocols.value = vnc/qxl, spice/qxl > > > I like this approach better than naming the keys with terms > ...devices.vnc.VMDviceType….
+1 if not too much complicated > >> So, how should the engine be modified to allow multiple video cards for each >> display protocol? What do you think should be done? > >> Thanks, >> Vitor de Lima >> _______________________________________________ >> Engine-devel mailing list >> Engine-devel@ovirt.org >> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel > > _______________________________________________ > Engine-devel mailing list > Engine-devel@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
