On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 06:55:40AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 11:03 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 01/31/2012 11:14 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 02:08:38PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2012-01-31 at 15:33 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > > > On 01/31/2012 03:21 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > > > > On 2012-01-31 14:10, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > > > > > On 01/31/2012 02:57 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > > > > >>>>> Seems fine, but do we really need the option? If it doesn't work we > > > > > > >>>>> should treat it as an ordinary but and fix it. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> So far it's against the architecture of the emulated system: our current > > > > > > >>>> chipset predates 64 bit PCI. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> Then it should be enabled/disabled at the chipset level. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Makes me wonder if we already do some filtering if the device supports > > > > > > >> 64 bit but the next bridge does not. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Our 440fx does support 64-bit bars, so the question doesn't arise for > > > > > > > x86. Instead we violate the spec. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you mean by "our" the 440fx-qemu, not the real 440fx. That one does > > > > > > not even support >1GB RAM. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, that's what I meant. It also supports pci hotplug, more slots, cpu > > > > > hotplug, etc. > > > > > > > > I'll drop this patch for now, it was just something I enabled based on a > > > > query from MST and didn't want to lose it. Maybe we need the option in > > > > PCI core, but I'm just turn it on and hope for the best w/o giving users > > > > a way to disable it. Thanks, > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > The patch itself makes sense to me. > > > Avi found some bugs in 64 bit BAR handling, let's wait till that is > > > fixed then merge this patch. > > > > The bugs are unrelated to 64-bit BARs. > > > > Alex, why drop the patch? We're far from a release, if there are indeed > > bugs there, we'll find out. > > I think maybe this should be a core pci device option so we don't have > pci-assign.mem64 vs virtio-net-pci.64bit. I'd like to always set the > MEM64 bit to match hardware when registering a BAR and let PCI core > decide whether to expose it that way. Besides the bugs, there aren't any reasons not to expose it that way, right? > Besides, it was unrelated to the > bulk of the series. Thanks, > > Alex > > -- 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
