* Andrea Bolognani (abolo...@redhat.com) wrote: > On Thu, 2018-06-07 at 15:45 +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > * Andrea Bolognani (abolo...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > On Thu, 2018-06-07 at 14:49 +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > > > Including the nvram and efi makes me nervous; but I can see why together > > > > they might work. However, there's no guarantee that EFI has been tested > > > > with the QEMU it's used on and ... that could be trouble. > > > > > > If the QEMU binary doesn't support EFI, then a guest expecting > > > EFI won't be able to start regardless of where the EFI ROM came > > > from. > > > > No, I mean if the QEMU doesn't support that *particular* EFI. > > I could be wrong, but I feel like it's significantly less likely > that a random QEMU binary won't like a random EFI ROM than it is > for a random EFI ROM to not like a random EFI NVRAM.
True, but it's not that rare to find SeaBIOS+qemu version problems; so I'll assume the same happens with EFI. > > > > Also, if we're going to start including the EFI rom then that would have > > > > to be migrated with the VM so that after a restart on a different host > > > > it's still using the right ROM that's compatible with it's varfile. > > > > > > That's a problem that needs to be addressed anyway, because even > > > as it is now you could easily find yourself trying and failing > > > to migrate a guest between two hosts that have different and > > > incompatible EFI ROMs installed. > > > > True; although I was working on the basis that vendors who cared about > > migration compatibility would couple the EFI versions with machine types > > to ensure that the variable data didn't become incompatible. > > As far as I know, nobody is actually doing this at the moment. I'm assuming we'll have to. Dave > -- > Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK