> Apologies if I'm missing something, I didn't look too closely at this series, > however have you seen this thread? > > http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-May/msg01071.html I haven’t noticed that some work has been done on that, thank you! > My understanding of the current code is that the cached vioserial/ccw/pciaddrs > lists in qemu aren't actually required…they were at one point to handle > older qemu, but we dropped that support. Maybe you can pick up my patches and > finish off dropping of pciaddrs and ccwaddrs? I suspect the pciaddrs cache in > bhyve can be dropped as well, I don't think it was ever strictly required, the > code just followed the qemu example If we could do without the caching, it would make the current code simpler. There wouldn’t be those booleans in qemu_hotplug.c that remember whether an address has to be deleted or not in case something fails. We could delete qemuDomainReleaseDeviceAddress() and a few more functions. I examined vioserial and pci addresses and it looks like it could be done. However, I'm not an expert on qemu_hotplug yet and this is where the interesting stuff happens with addresses, so I am not entirely sure yet. I also don't know what the plans are for device addresses in the future. Perhaps there are some features that will require caching them. I think that recalculation may change the current behavior of ccw addresses. Function virDomainCCWAddressReleaseAddr() modifies addrs->next only when the address being released was the address most recently assigned. Laine, you know a lot about PCI addresses and you also mentioned that you want to modify them in the future. What do you think? Martin, should I work on that instead? Kind regards, Tomasz -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list