On 2012-01-15 15:29, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 03:21:45PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2012-01-15 14:39, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 01/15/2012 03:27 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>>> On 15.01.2012 17:18, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>>> On 01/15/2012 03:10 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>>>> []
>>>>>> FWIW, I had to patch extboot back in for debian qemu-kvm 1.0, because
>>>>>> of lack of boot support from scsi (and no alternative), and because
>>>>>> many people's scripts who used boot= broke.  I thought it is better
>>>>>> to let users to have a chance to perform a smoother transition than
>>>>>> to break their stuff.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's really sad that people have to use lsi scsi.  Luckily qemu 1.1 will
>>>>> feature virtio-scsi, though of course that doesn't help already
>>>>> installed guests or non Windows/Linux guests.  Do you know what the use
>>>>> cases requiring scsi boot are?
>>>>
>>>> I've one (not very pleasant) bugreport handy, http://bugs.debian.org/652447
>>>> and a few private messages asking me for ways to restore booting from scsi,
>>>> all talking about older/custom systems which worked for years in kvm.
>>>> As you can see in the bugreport mentioned, I know that scsi is broken
>>>> and should not be used and so on, and suggested switching from it on
>>>> every chance.
>>>
>>> Well we don't want to break people's guests.  If the fix Gleb alluded to
>>> doesn't work, we'll have to restore extboot or something similar.  Let
>>> us know.
>>
>> I would vote for proper seabios support or a free option rom. That would
>> allow us to make progress with obsoleting qemu-kvm instead of making a
>> step back again.
>>
> It is not enough to vote, somebody has to send patches :) And it seams
> there are two kind of people: those who can make such a patch, but don't
> because they know enough to avoid qemu lsi emulation and those who can't
> make it and use lsi qemu emulation.

I'm pretty sure there is also a set of people who need to use LSI and
can write the proper support.

Jan

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to