On 12/08/2011 06:56 PM, Laine Stump wrote: > On 12/08/2011 05:43 PM, Eric Blake wrote: >> On 12/08/2011 03:08 PM, Laine Stump wrote: >>> (I'm thinking of appying this patch to libvirt in the F15 and F16 >>> branches, as well as Rawhide. The intent is to prepare everyone for >>> qemu's removal of support for the "fedora-13" machine type, which will >>> happen in F17 (already done in Rawhide)). >>> >>> This addresses https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=754772 . >>> It should only be applied to Fedora builds of libvirt (it seems >>> appropriate to apply it to all versions currently in support). >>> >>> --- >>> src/conf/domain_conf.c | 52 >>> ++++++++++++++++++- >>> .../qemuxml2argv-encrypted-disk.args | 2 +- >>> .../qemuxml2argv-encrypted-disk.xml | 2 +- >> The 4 line change to the testsuite is probably worth proposing upstream >> (upstream should try to favor upstream qemu names, rather than a >> Fedora-specific name), > > > I thought of that, but then realized that it's irrelevant, since that > config / commandline is never passed to an actual qemu, and the tests > still pass. > > I can still send it separately upstream, but it needs to stay here, > since make check will otherwise fail once the rest of the patch is > applied. (I suppose I can put it in a separate patch, so that the main > patch can be the same for rawhide and F16.)
Yes, the tests fix needs to be present in Fedora, whether bundled in
this Fedora-specific patch or as a backport of the upstream tweak.
> This looks really ugly to me. Is it really necessary, seeing that none
> of the other hypervisor types uses the machine name "fedora-13"? As a
> matter of fact it looks like os.machine is only used in 2 places outside
> of domain_conf.c and the qemu directory:
>
> *** src/xenxs/xen_xm.c:
> xenParseXM[271] if (!(def->os.machine =
> strdup(defaultMachine)))
>
> *** src/vbox/vbox_tmpl.c:
> <global>[3746] VIR_DEBUG("def->os.machine %s",
> def->os.machine);
Okay, you're starting to convince me that it probably won't hurt xen or
vbox, and no one else cared. If no one else speaks up in the next day
or so, then I won't mind the simpler patch that skips the gating.
>> Same comment about gating this to just qemu. Also, do we want to print
>> the VIR_WARN on every dumpxml, or do we want to modify def->os.machine
>> in-place so that the remaining uses of the def are already at pc-0.13?
>
>
> I had thought about that, but the idea of modifying an object that the
> caller is expecting to not change wasn't very appealing to me. I could
> be persuaded otherwise, though.
>
> (Actually I thought I'd just removed that VIR_WARN(), because I'd
> discovered that during the managedsave of a single 1GB domain,
> virDomainFormatDef was called 234 times!)
I'm okay with not doing the in-place modification, but then you are
correct that we shouldn't VIR_WARN in that case.
>> Except for the missing gating, it looks reasonable; I'll take some time
>> to test a domain snapshot taken before the patch and loaded after and
>> report back with that (but at first glance, it should work).
>>
>
>
> It may also be useful to start a domain running prior to the upgrade,
> then do a snapshot after the upgrade is finished and see if it gets the
> right machine type in the xml that's stored in the snapshot file.
Yep, I'll include that in my testing results.
--
Eric Blake [email protected] +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ virt mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/virt
