[libvirt PATCH 00/10] Cleanup and test more firmware handling scenarios

[Cole Robinson]

On 2/16/22 8:17 AM, Michal Prívozník wrote:
> On 2/15/22 19:54, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>> There are a mind bending number of possible ways to configure the
>> firmware with/without NVRAM. Only a small portion are tested and
>> many error scenarios are silently ignored.
>>
>> This series attempts to get coverage of every possible XML config
>> scenario and report explicit errors in all invalid configs.
>>
>> There is an open question on patch 4.  Essentially the use of NVRAM
>> combined with writable executable feels like an accidental feature
>> in libvirt that hasn't really been thought through. I'd like to
>> better define expectations here but there are several possible
>> strategies and I'm undecided which is best.
>>
>> Daniel P. Berrangé (10):
>>   qemu: fix bad indentation for qemuDomainNVRAMPathFormat
>>   tests: add explicit test case for pflash loader lacking path
>>   tests: add test case for NVRAM with template
>>   conf: validate NVRAM template usage with R/W loader binary
>>   tests: don't permit NVRAM path when using firmware auto-select
>>   qemu: inline code for filling in per-VM NVRAM path
>>   conf: rename struct field for NVRAM template
>>   conf: switch nvram parsing to use XML node / property helpers
>>   conf: move nvram parsing into virDomainLoaderDefParseXML
>>   conf: stop ignoring <loader>/<nvram> with firmware auto-select
>>

>>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn at redhat.com>
> 
> Michal
> 

I don't see the last 3 patches in git. Daniel was that intentional?

Thanks,
Cole