On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 02:30:06AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 07/12/17 10:22, Thomas Huth wrote: > > We don't want to carry along old machine types forever. If we are able to > > remove the pc machines up to 0.13 one day for example, this would allow > > us to eventually kill the code for rombar=0 (i.e. where QEMU copies ROM > > BARs directly to low memory). Everything up to pc-1.2 is also known to > > have issues with migration. So let's start with a deprecation message > > for the old machine types so that the (hopefully) few users of these old > > systems start switching over to newer machine types instead. > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> > > --- > > Note: Even if we mark all these old machines as deprecated, this ofcourse > > doesn't mean that we also have to remove them all at once later when we > > decide to finally really remove some. We could then also start by removing > > 0.10 and 0.11 only, for example (since there should really be no users left > > for these), or only up to 0.13 (to be able to kill rombar=0). > > On a tangent: "rombar=0" shouldn't be killed before the libvirt domain > XML regains the ability to say, "don't load any oprom for this device". > Please see <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1425058>. > > (Please note that it is not lost on me that rombar=0 is a poor > substitute for romfile='', but currently rombar=0 is the only fallback > through libvirt. See the BZ pls.) > > Thanks > Laszlo
rombar=0 would start meaning "no ROM", not "no BAR but still add a rom".
