From c0d9f7d0bcedeaa65d5c984fbe0d351e1402eab5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Huth Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 18:40:01 +0100 Subject: docs: Add a note about mixing bootindex with "-boot order" Occasionally the users try to mix the bootindex properties with the "-boot order" parameter - and this likely does not give the expected results. So let's add a proper statement that these two concepts should not be used together. Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth Message-Id: <1488303601-23741-1-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Eric Blake Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini --- docs/bootindex.txt | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) (limited to 'docs') diff --git a/docs/bootindex.txt b/docs/bootindex.txt index f84fac7200..b9a8ba122f 100644 --- a/docs/bootindex.txt +++ b/docs/bootindex.txt @@ -41,3 +41,12 @@ has three bootable devices target1, target3, target5 connected to it, the option ROM will have a boot method for each of them, but it is not possible to map from boot method back to a specific target. This is a shortcoming of the PC BIOS boot specification. + +== Mixing bootindex and boot order parameters == + +Note that it does not make sense to use the bootindex property together +with the "-boot order=..." (or "-boot once=...") parameter. The guest +firmware implementations normally either support the one or the other, +but not both parameters at the same time. Mixing them will result in +undefined behavior, and thus the guest firmware will likely not boot +from the expected devices. -- cgit v1.2.3-55-g7522