[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] 4.7 qemu regression: HVM guests fail to boot from xvda
On 03/06/16 12:45, Ian Jackson wrote: > George Dunlap writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] 4.7 qemu regression: HVM guests fail > to boot from xvda"): >> On 03/06/16 12:20, Olaf Hering wrote: >>> I think the regression is: 'vdev=xvda' does not result in a disk >>> connected to the emulated controller. Should we change the way hdtype= >>> is handled internally? If hdtype= is not given it remains unset and with >>> vdev=xvd* no disk-on-emulated-controller gets added. If hdtype= is set >>> then vdev=xvd* will result in an disk-on-emulated-controller, which >>> fixes the regression. If vdev=hd* and hdtype= was not set, hdtype will >>> be silently set to ide. >> >> I'd be OK with this. But is the "hdtype unset" also available at the >> libxl level? > > There are two problems with this `hdtype' approach. > > Firstly, it is global. That is, it applies to all disks of the > particular guest. But then maybe we don't care about that because > this anomalous major-number-stealing behaviour is probably per-guest > rather than per-disk. > > Secondly, the proposal above involves changing both the semantics of > existing `hdtype' parameter values, and the default hdtype value. The > resulting situation would be that even specifying vdev=hda wouldn't > get you an emulated device, by default, unless you specified `hdtype' > too. I don't think that is right. I don't quite understand this. First of all, if I make a disk with "vdev=xvda,hdtype=ide", what happens? I presume that the 'hdtype' field is effectively ignored? Secondly, why would the "vdev=hda" behavior change under Olaf's suggestion? I think what he's proposing (and again this is from a xl.cfg level, not a libxl level) is this: * "vdev=xvda": You get only a PV device. Under both XenoLinux and upstream Linux your PV device is named 'xvda'. (No change from existing semantics.) * "vdev=hda": You get an emulated IDE "backed" by a PV device. Under XenoLinux your PV device is named 'hda'. Under upstream Linux your PV device is named 'xvda' (No change from existing semantics.) * "vdev=xvda,hdtype=ide": You get an emulated IDE backed by a PV device. Under both XenoLinux and upstream Linux your PV device is named 'xvda'. (This is the only change.) At a libxl level, the exact same functionality is possible to enable, right? -George _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |