Re: [libvirt PATCH 00/10] Cleanup and test more firmware handling scenarios

On 2/15/22 19:54, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > There are a mind bending number of possible ways to configure the > firmware with/without NVRAM. Only a small portion are tested and > many error scenarios are silently ignored. > > This series attempts to get coverage of every possible XML config > scenario and report explicit errors in all invalid configs. > > There is an open question on patch 4. Essentially the use of NVRAM > combined with writable executable feels like an accidental feature > in libvirt that hasn't really been thought through. I'd like to > better define expectations here but there are several possible > strategies and I'm undecided which is best. > > Daniel P. Berrangé (10): > qemu: fix bad indentation for qemuDomainNVRAMPathFormat > tests: add explicit test case for pflash loader lacking path > tests: add test case for NVRAM with template > conf: validate NVRAM template usage with R/W loader binary > tests: don't permit NVRAM path when using firmware auto-select > qemu: inline code for filling in per-VM NVRAM path > conf: rename struct field for NVRAM template > conf: switch nvram parsing to use XML node / property helpers > conf: move nvram parsing into virDomainLoaderDefParseXML > conf: stop ignoring <loader>/<nvram> with firmware auto-select >

> Reviewed-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn(a)redhat.com&gt; Michal