> Please copy the virtio maintainer (Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>) on > virtio guest patches. Well, for now the issue is whether my understanding of qemu/pci-ids.txt and the comment in virtio_pci.c that both say that the full 0x1000 - 0x10ff range of PCI device IDs is donated for virtio_pci devices is correct. If that is true, virtio_pci only claiming 0x1000 - 0x103f doesn't make much sense to me and looks more like a typo, because there is no explicit justification (perhaps in a comment) either. (3f does not even show up in pci-ids.txt). The ranges mentioned there are: 1000 -> 10ef (one needs to contact Gerd to reserve an unallocated ID in that range) and 10f0 -> 10ff (available for experimental devices, a random ID in that range can be used during private development without asking anyone as long as you are not shipping anything using it) the range ef -> f0 (exclusive) is reserved. >From the above, my understanding is that virtio_pci should definitely claim at least 00 -> ef and most likely it should claim f0->ff too. The only reason not to claim some IDs is to allow someone to have virtio PCI devices that do *not* use the virtio_pci infrastructure but why would we want that? The reason I asked here (I guess qemu-devel would be just as relevant or more, but it has more traffic) is because Anthony is the author of virtio_pci.c (at least it looks like it) so hopefully he knows if that 3f was a typo or not and Gerd is responsible for the PCI ID namespace management so he knows if pci-ids.txt is correct or not. Once this issue is clarified I 'm happy to resend the same or an improved version of the patch as appropriate. Thanks, Pantelis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html