Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757395AbXKGFkj (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Nov 2007 00:40:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755254AbXKGFkR (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Nov 2007 00:40:17 -0500 Received: from il.qumranet.com ([82.166.9.18]:36985 "EHLO il.qumranet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754765AbXKGFkP (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Nov 2007 00:40:15 -0500 Message-ID: <47314FBD.1070505@qumranet.com> Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2007 07:40:13 +0200 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070727) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gregory Haskins CC: Anthony Liguori , Rusty Russell , Dor Laor , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Use of virtio device IDs References: <4730A15A.6070001@us.ibm.com> <4730B753.2000901@us.ibm.com> <4731334A.6090405@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4731334A.6090405@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (firebolt.argo.co.il [0.0.0.0]); Wed, 07 Nov 2007 07:40:14 +0200 (IST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1978 Lines: 51 Gregory Haskins wrote: > Anthony Liguori wrote: > > >> Right now, we would have to have every PCI vendor/device ID pair in the >> virtio PCI driver ID table for every virtio device. >> > > I realize you guys are probably far down this road in the design > process, That doesn't mean we can't change it if it's wrong. > but FWIW: This is a major motivation for the reason that the > IOQ stuff I posted a while back used strings for device identification > instead of a fixed length, centrally managed namespace like PCI > vendor/dev-id. Then you can just name your device something reasonably > unique (e.g. "qumranet::veth", or "ibm-pvirt-clock"). > I dislike strings. They make it look as if you have a nice extensible interface, where in reality you have a poorly documented interface which leads to poor interoperability. I prefer nice structure where you can see all the limitations immediately. > (I realize that if you are going to do PCI, you need to make it > PCI-like. But I think using PCI in the first place is probably the > wrong direction. IMHO, there's really not a lot of reason to be > constrained by a hardware specification once you decide to go PV. This > is even more true if you want to support as many platforms as possible > (i.e. platforms that don't have PCI natively). > > PCI means that you can reuse all of the platform's infrastructure for irq allocation, discovery, device hotplug, and management. You can write it for new guests but backporting it to older guests will be a huge task. We will support non-pci for s390, but in order to support Windows and older Linux PCI is necessary. -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/