Re: [SeaBIOS] [PATCH] don't expose pvpanic device in the UI

[Gleb Natapov]

On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 04:14:36AM -0400, Vadim Rozenfeld wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gleb Natapov" 
> To: "Vadim Rozenfeld" 
> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , "Daniel P. Berrange" , "Marcel Apfelbaum" , [e-mail], [e-mail], "Gerd Hoffmann" , "Paolo Bonzini" , "Eric Blake" , "Andreas Färber" 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2013 6:05:27 PM
> Subject: Re: [SeaBIOS] [PATCH] don't expose pvpanic device in the UI
>
> On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 04:03:17AM -0400, Vadim Rozenfeld wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gleb Natapov" 
> > To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" 
> > Cc: "Daniel P. Berrange" , "Marcel Apfelbaum" , [e-mail], [e-mail], "Gerd Hoffmann" , "Paolo Bonzini" , "Eric Blake" , "Andreas Färber" 
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2013 5:34:06 PM
> > Subject: Re: [SeaBIOS] [PATCH] don't expose pvpanic device in the UI
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 09:32:18PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > As you see we do let people change many parameters
> > > > > that do affect activation.
> > > >
> > > > By editing XML user can shoot himself in the foot, we should not prevent
> > > > that.
> > >
> > > So that's what I'm saying basically.
> > > At the moment there's no way to remove this device from XML.
> > > That's just wrong.
> >
> > Can say the same about PV acpi hotpulg device.
> > > In QEMU, we have a standard way to specify devices with -device.
> > > That should be the interface for anything new really
> > > unless there's a very compelling reason for something else.
> >
> > We are disagree on compelling reason in this case obviously.
> > > *Not* building it into the PC machine type.
> > > > It should not be required though.
> > >
> > > libvirt can pass -device pvpanic by default if nothing
> > > is specified in XML. That discussion really has to happen
> > > on libvirt list.
> >
> > As Paolo said you are just pushing the "problem" up the stack
> > where it is harder to "solve". I put "problem" and "solve" in
> > quotes because I disagree that the problem that need to be solved
> > is identified correctly. The correct problem to be solved IMO is
> > writing Windows driver for the device.
> >
> > [VR]
> > This one shouldn't be too complicated. Can be done on weekend.
>
> Gal says he did it already.
>
> [VR]
> If so, we can add it to our build and make it public.

That's the plan :)