[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [PATCHv3 4/5] S390: Domain Schema for s390-virtio machines.



On 07/10/2012 05:50 PM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 09.07.2012 14:33, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote:
On 07/03/2012 06:18 PM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 29.06.2012 17:02, Viktor Mihajlovski wrote:
Added s390-virtio machine type to the XML schema for domains in order
to not fail the domain schema tests.

Signed-off-by: Viktor Mihajlovski<mihajlov linux vnet ibm com>
---
   docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
   1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng
b/docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng
index 912a1a2..70c7d16 100644
--- a/docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng
+++ b/docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng
@@ -283,6 +283,7 @@
             <ref name="hvmsparc"/>
             <ref name="hvmppc"/>
             <ref name="hvmppc64"/>
+<ref name="hvms390"/>
           </choice>
         </optional>
         <value>hvm</value>
@@ -369,6 +370,25 @@
         </optional>
       </group>
     </define>
+<define name="hvms390">
+<group>
+<optional>
+<attribute name="arch">
+<choice>
+<value>s390</value>
+<value>s390x</value>
+</choice>
+</attribute>
+</optional>
+<optional>
+<attribute name="machine">
+<choice>
+<value>s390-virtio</value>

[1]^^

+</choice>
+</attribute>
+</optional>
+</group>
+</define>
     <define name="osexe">
       <element name="os">
         <element name="type">


Sorry cannot ACK this one until you update the documentation as well.

Michal


Hi Michal,

actually I was pondering about a doc update when preparing the patches.
I only wasn't clear where to put it. The only place where possible
arch/machine values are mentioned seems to be in formatcaps.html.in.
Would you expect me to add a sample output of the capabilities XML for
s390 with some comments in there, or did you have something else in mind?

Thanks.


Actually, now I am going through docs I don't see a proper place
neither. Moreover, in formatdomain.html.in we state: "The Capabilities
XML provides details on allowed values for these" [these = @machine and
@type] So as long as we report them in capabilities XML I guess we don't
really need an doc extension.

However, I think this [1] should be virtio-s390 instead of s390-virtio
since we use the former among the code.

What do you think?

Michal


the naming is awkward and I stumble over it from time to time too. Unfortunately this is the terminology qemu uses.

In a nutshell:
s390-virtio = machine type, meaning s390 machine with virtio bus
virtio-s390 = bus type, meaning s390-specific virtio bus

The current virtio bus on s390 is a fully virtual bus not related to a real hardware bus like the PCI bus on the other architectures. So, while the names looks strange, they are technically correct.

--

Mit freundlichen Grüßen/Kind Regards
   Viktor Mihajlovski

IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter
Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]