Thx Wei! I updated the db and it worked. Host value of UEFI supported is false again.
Does it make sense to open an issue to add a code for a check to CS? Regards, Swen -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Wei ZHOU <ustcweiz...@gmail.com> Gesendet: Dienstag, 20. Februar 2024 13:56 An: users@cloudstack.apache.org Betreff: Re: testing with uefi on Ubuntu22 KVM Hi, > guest.nvram.template.secure=/usr/share/OVMF/OVMF_VARS.fd This is incorrect, please use `OVMF_VARS.ms.fd` or `OVMF_VARS_4M.ms.fd`. > Is it safe to just delete the row in the db? Yes, it is safe. -Wei On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 at 13:31, <m...@swen.io> wrote: > Hi, > > I started testing with uefi on Ubuntu 22 KVM. I search the mailinglist > and found some discussion and problems with uefi secure mode on Ubuntu22 KVM. > > Is there already a fix for "Guest has not initialized the display > (yet)."-prolem on console proxy? > > > > For my test I added /etc/cloudstack/agent/uefi.properties with the > following > values: > > guest.nvram.template.secure=/usr/share/OVMF/OVMF_VARS.fd > > guest.nvram.template.legacy=/usr/share/OVMF/OVMF_VARS.fd > > guest.loader.secure=/usr/share/OVMF/OVMF_CODE.secboot.fd > > guest.loader.legacy=/usr/share/OVMF/OVMF_CODE.fd > > guest.nvram.path=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/nvram/ > > > > I also added the following line to /etc/libvirt/qemu.conf: > > nvram = > ["/usr/share/OVMF/OVMF_CODE.secboot.fd:/usr/share/OVMF/OVMF_VARS.fd"] > > > > I restarted the following services: > > service libvirtd restart > > service cloudstack-agent restart > > > > I can see that CS is now showing the host as UEFI supported = true and > CS added a row to db table host_details: > > | 7176 | 4 | host.uefi.enable | > true > | > > > > I tried to disable UEFI support for this host by deleting the > uefi.properties file and deleted the added line in qemu.conf file. I > restarted both services. > > It looks like CS is not being updated. UI still shows me UEFI > supported = true and db still shows me the row. > > Is this expected? I know that there is a check if UEFI is supported by > the agent. This was implemented in 4.15 or 4.16 if I remember > correctly. But is there also a check which will disable the support for a > host? > > > > Is it save to just delete the row in the db? > > > > Regards, > > Swen > >
