On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 12:22 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 07:17:03PM +0800, Yi Min Zhao wrote: > > 在 2018/7/26 下午7:00, Andrea Bolognani 写道: > > > From the test cases I see a zpci devices, with its own uid and fid, > > > is created for the pci-bridge as well... Is that intentional? > > > > Firstly pci bridge can be auto-generated if a pci device is to be plugged to > > non-existing pci bus. > > IIUC, pci-bridge is treated as a controller device in libvirt. So I think, > > it's pretty readable not only > > in libvirt xml but also in qtree, if we assign zpci device for it. Otherwise > > address type of pci-bridge > > is pci type but has no uid and fid. Isn't it odd? Everything about zPCI is odd ;) I guess there's no harm in creating an additional zpci device, and as you say it will keep things a bit more consistent, which is good. > From the libvirt side we must avoid any scenario where QEMU auto-adds > devices behind our back. If adding a device requires adding a controller > libvirt must do this explicitly and record it in the XML. Definitely. My question was whether the corresponding zpci device should be created as well... -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
