Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v3 2/5] libxl: add support for PVH

On 10/2/18 4:50 PM, Jim Fehlig wrote: > On 9/30/18 8:15 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > > Since this is something between PV and HVM, it makes sense to put the > > setting in place where domain type is specified. > > To enable it, use <os><type machine="xenpvh">...</type></os>. It is > > also included in capabilities.xml, for every supported HVM guest type - it > > doesn't seems to be any other requirement (besides new enough Xen). > > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek(a)invisiblethingslab.com&gt; > > --- > > Changes in v2 proposed by Jim: > >   - use new_arch_added var instead of i == nr_guest_archs for clarity > >   - improve comment > >   - adjust for now required Xen >= 4.6 (remove part for Xen < 4.5) > > > > Changes in v3: > >   - limit VIR_DOMAIN_OSTYPE_XEN -> VIR_DOMAIN_OSTYPE_LINUX conversion to > >   Xen PV only > >   - do not accept VIR_DOMAIN_OSTYPE_LINUX for PVH > >   - fix reported capabilities for PVH - remove hostdev passthrough and > >   video/graphics > > No video, graphics or hostdev passthrough - bummer. Begs the question: > what to do with PVH XML config containing these devices? Reject it? > Silently ignore? I'll also need to remember to enable these as PVH gains > support for the devices. > > >   - use #ifdef LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_PVH instead of hypervisor version to > >   check for PVH support > > This is a much better approach than the version check. I should have > thought of that earlier, sorry. Actually it is not. LIBXL_DOMAIN_TYPE_PVH is a value in the enum libxl_domain_type. Too bad PVH support isn't advertised in libxl.h with something like LIBXL_HAVE_PVH. Looks like we are stuck with the version check :-(.