Bug 2026955
Summary: | RFE: set default resolution/EDID info to a more sensible modern size like 1280x800 (WXGA) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | Reporter: | Daniel Berrangé <berrange> |
Component: | qemu-kvm | Assignee: | Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel> |
qemu-kvm sub component: | Graphics | QA Contact: | Guo, Zhiyi <zhguo> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | Docs Contact: | |
Severity: | medium | ||
Priority: | medium | CC: | coli, jinl, jinzhao, juzhang, kkiwi, kraxel, mrezanin, redhat-bugzilla, virt-maint, yfu |
Version: | 9.0 | Keywords: | FutureFeature, Triaged |
Target Milestone: | rc | Flags: | zhguo:
needinfo-
|
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | qemu-kvm-7.0.0-4.el9 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2022-11-15 09:53:29 UTC | Type: | Feature Request |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 2026132 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Daniel Berrangé
2021-11-26 15:58:14 UTC
Verify with edk2-20220221gitb24306f15d-2.el9 qemu-kvm-7.0.0-4.el9 check the resolution of both rhel and windows vm in different scenarios rhel 9.1 VM: q35 + ovmf + bochs-display: 1280x800 q35 + ovmf + virtio-vga: 1280x800 q35 + seabios + VGA: 1280x800 q35 + seabios + virtio-vga: 1280x800 pc + seabios + virtio-vga: 1280x800 pc + seabios + VGA: 1024x768 win 10 VM: q35 + ovmf + bochs-dispaly: 1280x800 q35 + ovmf + virtio-vga(viodod): 1024x768 q35 + ovmf + virtio-vga: 1280x800 q35 + seabios + VGA: 1024x768 q35 + seabios + virtio-vga(viodod): 1024x768 q35 + seabios + virtio-vga: 1024x768 pc + seabios + virtio-vga(viodod): 1024x768 pc + seabios + virtio-vga: 1024x768 pc + seabios + VGA: 1024x768 based on the result, the resolution may be 1024x768 in some scenarios, I'm not sure if it meets expectations.Can you help confirm it? Thanks. additional info: virtio-vga(viodod) means using virtio-vga device and having virtio driver in vm (In reply to jinl from comment #3) > Verify with edk2-20220221gitb24306f15d-2.el9 qemu-kvm-7.0.0-4.el9 > > check the resolution of both rhel and windows vm in different scenarios Gerd, could you also help to check the list? > > rhel 9.1 VM: > q35 + ovmf + bochs-display: 1280x800 > q35 + ovmf + virtio-vga: 1280x800 > q35 + seabios + VGA: 1280x800 > q35 + seabios + virtio-vga: 1280x800 > pc + seabios + virtio-vga: 1280x800 > pc + seabios + VGA: 1024x768 > > win 10 VM: > q35 + ovmf + bochs-dispaly: 1280x800 > q35 + ovmf + virtio-vga(viodod): 1024x768 I think we need to file a bug for virtio-win to select 1280x800 as default resolution for virtio-vga/virtio-gpu ? > q35 + ovmf + virtio-vga: 1280x800 > q35 + seabios + VGA: 1024x768 > q35 + seabios + virtio-vga(viodod): 1024x768 > q35 + seabios + virtio-vga: 1024x768 > pc + seabios + virtio-vga(viodod): 1024x768 > pc + seabios + virtio-vga: 1024x768 > pc + seabios + VGA: 1024x768 > > based on the result, the resolution may be 1024x768 in some scenarios, I'm > not sure if it meets expectations.Can you help confirm it? Thanks. I think we also need a qemu bug to track none virtio-win issue? Thanks! Zhiyi Looks like manually customizing resolution also has similar behavior as comment 3, here is the result: resolution manually set to 1920x1080 via -device xxx,xres=1920,yres=1080 rhel 9.1 VM: q35 + ovmf + bochs-display: work q35 + ovmf + virtio-vga: work q35 + seabios + VGA: work q35 + seabios + virtio-vga: work pc + seabios + virtio-vga: work pc + seabios + VGA: not work, resolution is still 1024x768 win 10 VM: q35 + ovmf + bochs-dispaly: work q35 + ovmf + virtio-vga(viodod): not work, resolution is still 1024x768 q35 + ovmf + virtio-vga: not work, resolution is still 1280x800 q35 + seabios + VGA: not work, resolution is still 1024x768 q35 + seabios + virtio-vga(viodod): not work, resolution is still 1024x768) q35 + seabios + virtio-vga: not work, resolution is still 1024x768 pc + seabios + virtio-vga(viodod): not work, resolution is still 1024x768 pc + seabios + virtio-vga: not work, resolution is still 1024x768 pc + seabios + VGA: not work, resolution is still 1024x768 > > rhel 9.1 VM: > > q35 + seabios + VGA: 1280x800 > > pc + seabios + VGA: 1024x768 Hmm, that is strange, can you double-check? The machine type shouldn't make a difference here, also can't reproduce this. > > win 10 VM: > > q35 + ovmf + bochs-dispaly: 1280x800 > > q35 + ovmf + virtio-vga(viodod): 1024x768 > > I think we need to file a bug for virtio-win to select 1280x800 as default > resolution for virtio-vga/virtio-gpu ? Looks like the windows driver doesn't query the host for the resolution. I guess setting a resolution via xres+yres doesn't work either? Yes, please open a bug for that. > > based on the result, the resolution may be 1024x768 in some scenarios, I'm > > not sure if it meets expectations.Can you help confirm it? Thanks. When running with seabios and not using the windows driver windows seems ask the vgabios for 1024x768 no matter what, and I don't think we can do much about it. (In reply to Gerd Hoffmann from comment #7) > > > rhel 9.1 VM: > > > q35 + seabios + VGA: 1280x800 > > > pc + seabios + VGA: 1024x768 > > Hmm, that is strange, can you double-check? The machine type > shouldn't make a difference here, also can't reproduce this. > Hi, double-check with these scenarios, the result is the same. (In reply to jinl from comment #8) > (In reply to Gerd Hoffmann from comment #7) > > > > rhel 9.1 VM: > > > > q35 + seabios + VGA: 1280x800 > > > > pc + seabios + VGA: 1024x768 > > > > Hmm, that is strange, can you double-check? The machine type > > shouldn't make a difference here, also can't reproduce this. > > > Hi, double-check with these scenarios, the result is the same. Have double checked pc + seabios + VGA with rhel 9.1 VM, vm default resolution is indeed 1024x768. What's more, vm default resolution is still 1024x768 even has qemu option -device '{"driver":"VGA","id":"video0","vgamem_mb":16,"xres":1920,"yres":1080,"bus":"pci.0","addr":"0x2"}' Gerd, should we file a bug about this behavior? > Have double checked pc + seabios + VGA with rhel 9.1 VM, vm default
> resolution is indeed 1024x768.
> What's more, vm default resolution is still 1024x768 even has qemu option
> -device
> '{"driver":"VGA","id":"video0","vgamem_mb":16,"xres":1920,"yres":1080,"bus":
> "pci.0","addr":"0x2"}'
Ok, it's because 'pc' is deprecated and doesn't get new machine types:
⬢[kraxel@toolbox ~]$ /usr/libexec/qemu-kvm -M help
Supported machines are:
pc RHEL 7.6.0 PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996) (alias of pc-i440fx-rhel7.6.0)
pc-i440fx-rhel7.6.0 RHEL 7.6.0 PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996) (default) (deprecated)
q35 RHEL-9.0.0 PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009) (alias of pc-q35-rhel9.0.0)
pc-q35-rhel9.0.0 RHEL-9.0.0 PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009)
pc-q35-rhel8.6.0 RHEL-8.6.0 PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009) (deprecated)
[ ... snip ... ]
So all the new goodies added since 7.6 are disabled by default for backward
compatibility reasons. Specifically edid support is turned off, which is
used to tell the guest what resolution it should use.
Using '/usr/libexec/qemu-kvm -M pc -device VGA,edid=on' works for me.
(In reply to Gerd Hoffmann from comment #10) > > Using '/usr/libexec/qemu-kvm -M pc -device VGA,edid=on' works for me. Yep, this indeed works. I think based on above comments, we have already verified this bug. Gerd, could you help to set the proper flags to this bug so we can mark this bug verified? Zhiyi Gating test pass with 'qemu-kvm-7.0.0-4.el9', add 'Verified:Tested,SanityOnly' accordingly Verified per comment 3, 7, 10 Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory (Moderate: qemu-kvm security, bug fix, and enhancement update), and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2022:7967 |