Re: [PATCH] docs: Discourage users from using fwcfg
On 9/7/20 3:57 PM, Martin Kletzander wrote:
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 03:48:16PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> Even though this was brought up in upstream discussion [1] it
> missed my patches: users should prefer <oemStrings/> over fwcfg.
> The reason is that fwcfg is considered somewhat internal to QEMU
> and it has limited number of slots and neither of these applies
> to <oemStrings/>.
>
> While I'm at it, I'm fixing the example too (because it contains
> incorrect element name) and clarifying sysfs/ exposure.
>
> 1: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2020-May/msg00957.html
>
> Reported-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek(a)redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn(a)redhat.com>
> ---
> docs/formatdomain.rst | 14 +++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
It's nice that you say that, but people who would like to use
fw_cfg for
passing
in a huge blob, which is saved in a file, will read this, go to
<oemStrings/>
and see that there is no way to pass a file as an input. Should that be
dealt
with somehow? Or would that be discouraged as well?
Unfortunately, QEMU doesn't allow reading OEM strings from a file (at
least quick glance over hw/smbios/smbios.c doesn't show any signs it's
allowed).
Michal