On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 12:27:08PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 06/15/2009 12:08 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: >>> This last option makes sense to me: in a real world the user has >>> control over where he places the device on the bus, so why >>> not with qemu? >>> >> >> Yep, most people seem to agree that it makes sense to allow this, but >> some believe it should only be via a machine description file, not the >> command line. >> > > I don't understand this opposition. It's clear a machine config file is > a long way in our future. It's also clear lack of stable PCI addresses > hurts us now. > >> However, the first problem is that it isn't a solution to the guest ABI >> problem more generally. >> > > pci_addr was never meant to bring world peace, just stable PCI > addresses. The other issues should be addressed separately. > >> And the second problem is that for e.g. libvirt to use it, it would have >> to be possible to query qemu for what PCI slots were assigned to the >> devices - libvirt would need to be able to parse 'info pci' and match >> the devices listed with the devices specified on the command line. >> > > If all devices (including vga, ide) are set up with pci_addr, then this > is unneeded. Right. I think it could be an all or nothing at all approach. > You do need to export available slot numbers from qemu. Why would a slot be unavailable? -- 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
