On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 04:13:43PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > On Thu, 2017-04-27 at 10:24 +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote: > > > You're technically correct[1]. However, piix3-uhci is > > > another piece of Intel-derived hardware so in practice > > > qemu-system-aarch64 is very unlikely to have it compiled > > > in and most users will end up getting the error instead. > > > > Isn't the nec-xhci also Intel hardware, so the same would apply to that > > controller as well. > > Not quite: > > Intel Corporation 82371SB PIIX3 USB [Natoma/Triton II] [8086:7020] > NEC Corporation uPD720200 USB 3.0 Host Controller [1033:0194] > > The vendor for piix3-uhci is Intel Corporation, the vendor > for nec-xhci is NEC Corporation. > > I guess both are unlikely to show up in actual aarch64 > hardware, but the former is clearly x86-specific while the > latter is somewhat more architecture-agnostic. > > > Moreover, this probably happens only for downstream > > builds of QEMU (most likely only RHEL/CentOS) as there is no configure > > option for that. QEMU has some default configs for different architectures > > but in upstream QEMU the set of UHCI usb controllers is enabled by default > > for aarch64. > > The upstream QEMU configuration takes the kitchen sink > approach, eg. qemu-system-ppc64 will include allwinner-ahci > and other devices that clearly have no place in a ppc64 > guest, so I don't think we should take that as an indication > that piix-uhci is something anyone will want to reasonably > use on aarch64 :) My point was that we should not make any decisions based on downstream configurations :). Like I said, I'll send v2 with nec-xhci enabled for aarch64. Pavel > > -- > Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization > > -- > libvir-list mailing list > libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
