On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 10:20:56 +0800 Dong Jia Shi <bjsdj...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> * Halil Pasic <pa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> [2017-11-24 17:39:04 +0100]: > > > > > > > On 11/24/2017 05:15 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > >>> In theory this should work. > > >>> > > >>> In reality it seems more complicated. A per-device property is easy and > > >>> can be > > >>> inspected on the command line (e.g. -device virtio-blk-ccw,help), while > > >>> a new > > >>> machine property would require to change the qemu help output and > > >>> qemu-options > > >>> file (which makes it visible for all architectures). > > >> And then we have the fun of describing, that this property is weird, and > > >> can > > >> not be set, and it's value does not matter. > > > Well, that's the case for both, no? > > > > > > I don't think we have to document _device_ properites in qemu-options.hx > > I don't see any documented neither for virtio-ccw nor for vfio-ccw. The > > machine properties, on the contrary, are documented in this file. > Is it sane and possible to reuse the existing s390-squash-mcss property > to achieve the goal? I mean, when it is false (which is the default > value), can we treat it as "we are allowed to put devices everywhere"? > Then we'd have the way to use a property of the -M to tell libvirt that > devices can be everywhere? > > However then we can not drop it completely I guess, since Libvirt will > depends on it. But we can ignore the operation of setting it's value to > true. I don't think we should reuse it, as it would have rather confusing semantics (which can't be easily sorted out unless you check for the qemu version).
