On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 12:29:58PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 01:24:05PM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 12:02:40PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> Libvirt's "domcapabilities" command has a way to state whether
>>> certain graphic frontends are available in QEMU or not. Originally,
>>> libvirt looked at the "--help" output of the QEMU binary to
determine
>>> whether SDL was available or not (by looking for the "-sdl"
parameter
>>> in the help text), but since libvirt stopped doing this analysis of
>>> the help text, the detection of SDL is currently broken, see:
>>>
>>>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1790902
>>>
>>> QEMU should provide a way via the QMP interface instead. The simplest
>>> way, without introducing additional commands, is to make the DisplayType
>>> enum entries conditional, so that the enum only contains the entries if
>>> the corresponding CONFIG_xxx switches have been set.
>>
>> Hmm, that'll break for the "dnf remove qemu-ui-sdl" case ...
>
> Note tht libvirt invalidates its cache of QEMU capabilities when it
> sees the /usr/lib64/qemu directory timestamp change. So it ought to
> pick up changes caused by installing/removing QEMU modules, and apply
> this to future queries for domcapabilities, or when starting future
> QEMU guests.
That'll work fine for modules implementing qom objects / devices,
because the list of available objects changes accordingly and libvirt
can see that.
The #if CONFIG_SDL approach will not work because qemu will continue to
report sdl as supported even when the sdl module is not installed any
more.
I guess we'd need a separate QMP command to fix that, which tries to load
the modules first when being called? Something similar to what is being done
in qemu_display_help() ?
That's certainly doable, too, just a little bit more complex... do we want
that? Or is the quick-n-easy way via the schema good enough for most use
cases? (I'm not that familiar with "virsh domcapabilities" ... is there any
real usage for the <graphics> section or is this rather cosmetical?)
Thomas
PS: My CI runs with the patch just finished, and apparently I missed some
#ifdefs in other parts of the code ... so I need to respin this patch
anyway, no matter which direction we decide to go...