On 09/14/2012 12:05 PM, Laine Stump wrote: > On 09/13/2012 06:16 AM, Shradha Shah wrote: >> On 09/11/2012 08:07 PM, Laine Stump wrote: >>> If so, one issue I have is that one of the devices (the >>> pci-passthrough?) doesn't have its guest-side PCI address visible >>> anywhere in the guest's XML, does it? This is problematic, because >>> management applications (and libvirt itself) expect to be able to scan >>> the list of devices to learn what PCI slots are occupied on the guest, >>> and where they can add new devices. >> Actually the guest PCI address of the pci-passthrough device i.e. The VF >> is visible in the guest's XML when the guest is running. The VF will be plugged >> into the guest only when the guest is running or when the guest is not being >> migrated hence will be visible in the guest XML. > > But there's only a place for one guest-side PCI address in each device > element. Where is it showing up? The guest PCI address of the pci-passthrough device is visible in <hostdev> device element and that of the virtio-net is visible in the <interface> device element. > > Also, we really need for the same PCI address to be used each time the > device is attached; although there may not appear to be a need for that > now, past experience has shown that changing the PCI slot of a device > over time inevitably leads to a problem somewhere with something :-/ > > Due to this, the general complexity of what's being done vs. what's > being added, and also time/review bandwidth constraints I think that at > least for this release we can't take the full hostdev-hybrid device > patchset (really I think it will need to be re-thought and probably a > different approach taken for specifying the two devices). > > However, the "ephemeral" attribute for <hostdev>, <interface > type='hostdev'> and <forward mode='hostdev'> is fairly straightforward > and provides generally useful new functionality (especially if it is > expanded as mentioned to work for save/restore as well as migration) - > with just this part of your patch, we can still get all of the desired > functionality at the level of libvirt XML (with the two limitations of > 1) networks limited to a single PF, and 2) duplicated mac addresses must > be manually specified). > > How difficult would it be to create a patch with just that part of the > functionality (plus the additional save/restore tweak)? If you could do > that before the freeze on Tuesday AM we might be able to get it into > 0.10.2 (which will be what Fedora 18 is based on). I can provide the required patches over the weekend. > -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list