On Thu, 2017-07-20 at 09:55 +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> In any case, that made me realize that not sending the model,
> even if automatically filled in, could cause issues in the
> future if a new model is added and becomes the default, as
> the guest ABI would not be preserved during migration then.
That is the main reason to fill all the values in right away. Since
there apparently was a period, where a default would be used, but not
recorded, it needs some trickery unfortunately.
In such case you basically standardize, that the now-filled-in default
model (which can't ever change) if it was not provided by the user is to
be dropped from the migratable XML.
Once you start assign a new default model, that then needs to be
explicitly sent over, so that the migration will not be successufl
unless the destination is able to use the new model.
This means basically, that a missing model name becomes assigned to a
particular value.
That makes sense.
Doesn't it also mean that we don't really need to record
whether the user set the model name explicitly or not? We
can just skip formatting it if it's spapr-pci-host-bridge
and all versions of libvirt, past or future, will handle
that correctly.
--
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization