On 21.03.2019 15:28, Erik Skultety wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:49:55AM +0000, Nikolay Shirokovskiy wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 21.03.2019 14:32, Erik Skultety wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 10:27:14AM +0300, Nikolay Shirokovskiy wrote:
>>>> Commit 3bd4ed46 introduced this element as required which
>>>> breaks backcompat for test driver. Let's make the element optional.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nikolay Shirokovskiy <nshirokovskiy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> docs/formatnode.html.in | 2 +-
>>>> docs/schemas/nodedev.rng | 12 ++++++-----
>>>> src/conf/node_device_conf.c | 23 +++++++++++-----------
>>>> src/conf/node_device_conf.h | 2 +-
>>>> src/node_device/node_device_udev.c | 2 +-
>>>> .../pci_0000_02_10_7_sriov_pf_vfs_all.xml | 1 -
>>>> 6 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/docs/formatnode.html.in b/docs/formatnode.html.in
>>>> index 5095b97..c2a8f8f 100644
>>>> --- a/docs/formatnode.html.in
>>>> +++ b/docs/formatnode.html.in
>>>> @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@
>>>> include:
>>>> <dl>
>>>> <dt><code>class</code></dt>
>>>> - <dd>Combined class, subclass and
>>>> + <dd>Optional element for combined class, subclass and
>>>> programming interface codes as 6-digit hexadecimal number.
>>>> <span class="since">Since 5.2.0</span></dd>
>>>> <dt><code>domain</code></dt>
>>>> diff --git a/docs/schemas/nodedev.rng b/docs/schemas/nodedev.rng
>>>> index 0f45d79..fe6ffa0 100644
>>>> --- a/docs/schemas/nodedev.rng
>>>> +++ b/docs/schemas/nodedev.rng
>>>> @@ -133,11 +133,13 @@
>>>> <value>pci</value>
>>>> </attribute>
>>>>
>>>> - <element name='class'>
>>>> - <data type="string">
>>>> - <param name="pattern">0x[0-9a-fA-F]{6}</param>
>>>> - </data>
>>>> - </element>
>>>> + <optional>
>>>> + <element name='class'>
>>>> + <data type="string">
>>>> + <param name="pattern">0x[0-9a-fA-F]{6}</param>
>>>> + </data>
>>>> + </element>
>>>> + </optional>
>>>> <element name='domain'>
>>>> <ref name='unsignedLong'/>
>>>> </element>
>>>> diff --git a/src/conf/node_device_conf.c b/src/conf/node_device_conf.c
>>>> index 19c601a..b96d10c 100644
>>>> --- a/src/conf/node_device_conf.c
>>>> +++ b/src/conf/node_device_conf.c
>>>> @@ -208,7 +208,8 @@ virNodeDeviceCapPCIDefFormat(virBufferPtr buf,
>>>> {
>>>> size_t i;
>>>>
>>>> - virBufferAsprintf(buf, "<class>0x%.6x</class>\n", data->pci_dev.klass);
>>>> + if (data->pci_dev.klass >= 0)
>>>> + virBufferAsprintf(buf, "<class>0x%.6x</class>\n", data->pci_dev.klass);
>>>
>>> Can 0 be a valid class? I mean semantically, can't 0 mean something like "no
>>> class"? I'm just wondering, whether we could report 0x000000, provided it
>>> doesn't denote a valid class already, instead of omitting the <class> element
>>> on the output, but then again, from mgmt app POV it doesn't make any difference
>>> to check whether the <class> element is missing or it reports 0 for devices
>>> that have no class specified.
>>>
>>> Do you have some further reading on the classes? I didn't manage to find
>>> anything that would help me decode the hex value.
>>
>> I found https://wiki.osdev.org/PCI. So looks like 0x000000 should be
>> treated as 'Unclassified/Non-VGA-Compatible devices'.
>
> Hmm, do you know whether udev would report 0x000000 for devices which don't
> report any class code (if there are any such devices out there) or it woudln't
> report anything to us? In which case what your have in this patch is the only
> right thing to do.
>
I need to take a look on udev/kernel code to answer the question...
Nikolay
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
