On 3/22/2022 5:29 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 10:21:41AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
Hi,
If you don't need a pflash device, don't use it: simply map your nvram
region as ram in your machine. No need to clutter the pflash model like
that.
Using the pflash device for something which isn't actually flash looks a
bit silly indeed.
I know it's dirty to hack the pflash device. The purpose is to make the user
interface unchanged that people can still use
-drive if=pflash,format=raw,unit=0,file=/path/to/OVMF_CODE.fd
-drive if=pflash,format=raw,unit=1,file=/path/to/OVMF_VARS.fd
to create TD guest.
Well, if persistent vars are not supported anyway there is little reason
to split the firmware into CODE and VARS files. You can use just use
OVMF.fd with a single pflash device. libvirt recently got support for
that.
Agreed.
The purpose of using split firmware is that people can share the same
code.fd while using different vars.fd
