Re: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] [PULL 25/26] block: Remove deprecated -drive option serial

On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 04:25:13PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 22.06.2018 um 15:36 hat Christian Borntraeger geschrieben: > > > > > > On 06/22/2018 02:55 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > > Am 22.06.2018 um 13:38 hat Christian Borntraeger geschrieben: > > >> > > >> On 06/15/2018 04:21 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > >>> The -drive option serial was deprecated in QEMU 2.10. It's time to > > >>> remove it. > > >>> > > >>> Tests need to be updated to set the serial number with -global instead > > >>> of using the -drive option. > > >> > > >> libvirt 4.5 still creates those (at least on s390x) > > >> > > >> <disk type='file' device='disk'> > > >> <driver name='qemu' type='qcow2' cache='none' io='native' iothread='1'/> > > >> <source file='/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/image.zhyp137'/> > > >> <target dev='hda' bus='virtio'/> > > >> <serial>skel</serial> > > >> <boot order='1'/> > > >> <address type='ccw' cssid='0xfe' ssid='0x0' devno='0x0000'/> > > >> </disk> > > >> > > >> > > >> -> > > >> [...] > > >> -drive file=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/image.zhyp137,format=qcow2,if=none,id=drive-virtio-disk0,serial=skel,cache=none,aio=native -device virtio-blk-ccw,iothread=iothread1,scsi=off,devno=fe.0.0000,drive=drive-virtio-disk0,id=virtio-disk0,bootindex=1,write-cache=on > > >> [...] > > >> > > >> 2018-06-22T11:25:20.946024Z qemu-system-s390x: -drive file=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/image.zhyp137,format=qcow2,if=none,id=drive-virtio-disk0,serial=skel,cache=none,aio=native: Block format 'qcow2' does not support the option 'serial' > > >> 2018-06-22 11:25:21.098+0000: shutting down, reason=failed > > >> > > >> So it seems that this breaks s390x. > > > > To me it seems that this is also broken on x86. > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. libvirt should fix this before QEMU 3.0 is > > > released. > > > > I think this is definitely too short notice. We should not break existing > > setups just by insisting that users have to update libvirt when they update > > QEMU. Yes, this might be our policy, but doing so "just because we can" > > is certainly a very bad attitude. I see no fundamental technical reason why > > we should not revert this change. > > This was in fact one release longer than our deprecation policy says. > Are we serious about the deprecation policy or aren't we? > > I might consider reverting a change if it turned out that this requires > some massive work in libvirt. But I think this one should be rather easy > to fix in libvirt until 3.0 is released. It is probably even possible for us to fix it in our July 1st release