Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v4 2/5] libxl: add support for PVH

On 10/17/18 12:59 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 08:46:19AM -0600, Jim Fehlig wrote: > > I had some couch time at the start of the weekend and was finally able to > > try using this series with virt-install. As it turns out, reporting > > duplicate <guest> blocks for <os_type> 'xen' is not quite right. Instead we > > will want to report the additional <machine> under the existing 'xen' > > <guest> blocks. > > Is that virt-install limitation? In that case, IMO virt-install should > be fixed, instead of changing capabilities xml to match its limitations. Perhaps it is a virt-install limitation, but my suggestion was based more on how the qemu driver reports the different machines <guest> <os_type>hvm</os_type> <arch name='x86_64'> <wordsize>64</wordsize> <emulator>/usr/bin/qemu-system-x86_64</emulator> <machine maxCpus='255'>pc-i440fx-3.0</machine> <machine maxCpus='288'>pc-q35-3.0</machine> ... </arch> </guest> Compare that with reporting PV and PVH in different <guest> blocks, where the <os_type> and <arch> are the same. It seems confusing from a consumers POV <guest> <os_type>xen</os_type> <arch name='x86_64'> <wordsize>64</wordsize> <emulator>/usr/bin/qemu-system-x86_64</emulator> <machine>xenpv</machine> </arch> </guest> <guest> <os_type>xen</os_type> <arch name='x86_64'> <wordsize>64</wordsize> <emulator>/usr/bin/qemu-system-x86_64</emulator> <machine>xenpvh</machine> </arch> </guest> How should a consumer interpret that? Is the machine for os_type=xen, arch=x86_64 a xenpv or a xenpvh?