Re: [libvirt] [PATCHv3 4/5] S390: Domain Schema for s390-virtio machines.

On 07/10/2012 05:50 PM, Michal Privoznik wrote: > On 09.07.2012 14:33, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote: >> On 07/03/2012 06:18 PM, Michal Privoznik wrote: >>> On 29.06.2012 17:02, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote: >>>> Added s390-virtio machine type to the XML schema for domains in order >>>> to not fail the domain schema tests. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Viktor Mihajlovski&lt;mihajlov(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com&gt; >>>> --- >>>> docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng >>>> b/docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng >>>> index 912a1a2..70c7d16 100644 >>>> --- a/docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng >>>> +++ b/docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng >>>> @@ -283,6 +283,7 @@ >>>> <ref name="hvmsparc"/> >>>> <ref name="hvmppc"/> >>>> <ref name="hvmppc64"/> >>>> +<ref name="hvms390"/> >>>> </choice> >>>> </optional> >>>> <value>hvm</value> >>>> @@ -369,6 +370,25 @@ >>>> </optional> >>>> </group> >>>> </define> >>>> +<define name="hvms390"> >>>> +<group> >>>> +<optional> >>>> +<attribute name="arch"> >>>> +<choice> >>>> +<value>s390</value> >>>> +<value>s390x</value> >>>> +</choice> >>>> +</attribute> >>>> +</optional> >>>> +<optional> >>>> +<attribute name="machine"> >>>> +<choice> >>>> +<value>s390-virtio</value> > > [1]^^ > >>>> +</choice> >>>> +</attribute> >>>> +</optional> >>>> +</group> >>>> +</define> >>>> <define name="osexe"> >>>> <element name="os"> >>>> <element name="type"> >>>> >>> >>> Sorry cannot ACK this one until you update the documentation as well. >>> >>> Michal >>> >> >> Hi Michal, >> >> actually I was pondering about a doc update when preparing the patches. >> I only wasn't clear where to put it. The only place where possible >> arch/machine values are mentioned seems to be in formatcaps.html.in. >> Would you expect me to add a sample output of the capabilities XML for >> s390 with some comments in there, or did you have something else in >> mind? >> >> Thanks. >> > > Actually, now I am going through docs I don't see a proper place > neither. Moreover, in formatdomain.html.in we state: "The Capabilities > XML provides details on allowed values for these" [these = @machine and > @type] So as long as we report them in capabilities XML I guess we don't > really need an doc extension. > > However, I think this [1] should be virtio-s390 instead of s390-virtio > since we use the former among the code. > > What do you think? > > Michal > the naming is awkward and I stumble over it from time to time too. Unfortunately this is the terminology qemu uses. In a nutshell: s390-virtio = machine type, meaning s390 machine with virtio bus virtio-s390 = bus type, meaning s390-specific virtio bus The current virtio bus on s390 is a fully virtual bus not related to a real hardware bus like the PCI bus on the other architectures. So, while the names looks strange, they are technically correct.