On Wed, 2019-01-30 at 17:38 +0100, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 04:32:09PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
<value>virtio-scsi</value> <value>lsisas1078</value> + <value>virtio-transitional</value> + <value>virtio-non-transitional</value>
As mentioned during the previous round of reviews, I think we should support model='virtio' (which would behave the same as the existing model='virtio-scsi') in order to have a nice, consistent experience for users and management application developers.
If we add model='virtio' we should always translate it back to 'virtio-scsi'. It's not a new model or new feature, it's just a different name for existing model and we should not break management applications that are already using 'virtio-scsi'. It would be basically only alias.
Definitely.
The question is whether it's useful, if management application starts using 'virtio' when creating new guest it would still had to be able to parse 'virtio-scsi' and my guess is that it would not help at all.
I agree that the value proposition is not that impressive once you've established the above. That said, implementing it is only going to take a couple of lines of code and it will allow applications that can afford to require very recent libvirt to only special-case SCSI controllers when parsing the configuration, instead of both when parsing and when formatting. I guess I just don't see a reason *not* to implement it. But if Cole doesn't want to go through with it that's fine, I can just post patches later myself :) -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization