On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 03:26:25PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 01:31:00PM -0500, miny...@acm.org wrote:
> > From: Corey Minyard
> >
> > Using the UUID that qemu generates probably isn't the best thing
> > to do, allow it to be passed in via properties, and use QemuU
On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 01:31:00PM -0500, miny...@acm.org wrote:
> From: Corey Minyard
>
> Using the UUID that qemu generates probably isn't the best thing
> to do, allow it to be passed in via properties, and use QemuUUID
> for the type.
AFAICT, QEMU isn't generating a UUID in the current code.
On 7/1/19 8:31 PM, miny...@acm.org wrote:
> From: Corey Minyard
>
> Using the UUID that qemu generates probably isn't the best thing
> to do, allow it to be passed in via properties, and use QemuUUID
> for the type.
>
> If the UUID is not set, return an unsupported command error. This
> way we
From: Corey Minyard
Using the UUID that qemu generates probably isn't the best thing
to do, allow it to be passed in via properties, and use QemuUUID
for the type.
If the UUID is not set, return an unsupported command error. This
way we are not providing an all-zero (or randomly generated) GUID
