qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw/s390x: Add the possibility to specify the ne


From: Christian Borntraeger
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw/s390x: Add the possibility to specify the netboot image on the command line
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:19:55 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0


On 03/05/2018 11:23 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 12:32:34 +0100
> Thomas Huth <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
>> The file name of the netboot binary is currently hard-coded to
>> "s390-netboot.img", without a possibility for the user to select
>> an alternative firmware image here. That's unfortunate, especially
>> since the basics are already there: The filename is a property of
>> the s390-ipl device. So we just have to add a check whether the user
>> already provided the property and only set the default if the string
>> is still empty. Now it is possible to select a different firmware
>> image with "-global s390-ipl.netboot_fw=/path/to/s390-netboot.img".
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <address@hidden>
>> ---
>>  hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 4 +++-
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
>> index 4abbe89..7b3fb5f 100644
>> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
>> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
>> @@ -254,8 +254,10 @@ static void s390_init_ipl_dev(const char 
>> *kernel_filename,
>>      }
>>      qdev_prop_set_string(dev, "cmdline", kernel_cmdline);
>>      qdev_prop_set_string(dev, "firmware", firmware);
>> -    qdev_prop_set_string(dev, "netboot_fw", netboot_fw);
>>      qdev_prop_set_bit(dev, "enforce_bios", enforce_bios);
>> +    if (!strlen(object_property_get_str(new, "netboot_fw", &error_abort))) {
>> +        qdev_prop_set_string(dev, "netboot_fw", netboot_fw);
>> +    }
>>      object_property_add_child(qdev_get_machine(), TYPE_S390_IPL,
>>                                new, NULL);
>>      object_unref(new);
> 
> So, any objections to me merging this? I think this makes sense for
> Thomas' use case.

Fine with me.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]