[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "relaxed" `-hda file.qcow2` equivalent ?
From: |
Frantisek Rysanek |
Subject: |
Re: "relaxed" `-hda file.qcow2` equivalent ? |
Date: |
Fri, 15 Nov 2024 15:10:02 +0100 |
Hmm. By now I'm thinking aloud.
According to the manpage (see below), "-blockdev" is the most "down
to earth", true and modern way to specify the emulated disk -
possibly needs to be combined with a "-device" to specify the
guest-side emulated interface? Curiously, I cannot find a complete
example...
The manpage says, that:
-hda (etc) is the oldest form, nowadays a macro for -drive + -device
(controller).
-drive is a shorthand for "-blockdev + -device"
So... where I'm using -drive, I might as well be using -blockdev .
Plus something more? No clue... :-)
Or perhaps use "-blockdev node-name=.." instead of "-drive id=.." ?
The qemu docs chapter on "QEMU block drivers" gives this example:
-blockdev
driver=qcow2,file.filename=/path/to/image,file.locking=off,file.driver
=file
I.e., you should put your locking=off option into a -blockdev
definition as you say.
And, I have an idea: rather than refer to driver=qcow2 and
file.filename, how about referring to the loopback device (NBD) that
you already have, courtesy of qemu-nbd ? Would that perhaps
circumvent the file lock? ;-)
-blockdev node-name=xy,driver=raw,file.driver=host_device,\
file.filename=/dev/loop0,file.locking=off
-device virtio-scsi-pci -device scsi-hd,drive=xy
Further reading:
https://manpages.debian.org/testing/qemu-system-x86/qemu-system-x86_64
.1.en.html#Block_device_options
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/753092/what-is-the-difference
-between-these-two-blockdev-declarations
https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/system/qemu-block-drivers.html#disk-i
mage-file-locking
Frank
Re: "relaxed" `-hda file.qcow2` equivalent ?, lacsaP Patatetom, 2024/11/14
Re: "relaxed" `-hda file.qcow2` equivalent ?, Frantisek Rysanek, 2024/11/14