On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 01:05:47PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani via Devel wrote: > Currently we only look at the value for the stateless attribute > itself when matching, but the <nvram> element being included in > the input XML is likewise a clear sign that a stateless firmware > build will not satisfy the user's requirements. > > Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <[email protected]> > --- > src/qemu/qemu_firmware.c | 8 +++++++- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <[email protected]> > > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_firmware.c b/src/qemu/qemu_firmware.c > index 1ecbee0c96..d1eba31103 100644 > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_firmware.c > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_firmware.c > @@ -1289,13 +1289,19 @@ qemuFirmwareMatchDomain(const virDomainDef *def, > /* Explicit requests for either a stateless or stateful > * firmware should be fulfilled, but if no preference is > * provided either one is fine as long as the other match > - * criteria are satisfied */ > + * criteria are satisfied. NVRAM implies stateful */ > if (loader && > loader->stateless == VIR_TRISTATE_BOOL_NO && > flash->mode == QEMU_FIRMWARE_FLASH_MODE_STATELESS) { > VIR_DEBUG("Discarding stateless loader"); > return false; > } > + if (loader && > + loader->nvram && > + flash->mode == QEMU_FIRMWARE_FLASH_MODE_STATELESS) { > + VIR_DEBUG("Discarding stateless loader"); > + return false; > + } That feels like a non-sensical scenario for a firmware descriptor. In a few other cases we VIR_WARN about nonsense descriptor settings, so perhaps here too ? > if (loader && > loader->stateless == VIR_TRISTATE_BOOL_YES && > flash->mode != QEMU_FIRMWARE_FLASH_MODE_STATELESS) { > -- > 2.53.0 > With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com ~~ https://hachyderm.io/@berrange :| |: https://libvirt.org ~~ https://entangle-photo.org :| |: https://pixelfed.art/berrange ~~ https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
