Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> That being said, on platforms which are PCI-centric, such as x86, this >> of course makes it a lot easier to produce virtual devices which work >> across hypervisors, since the device model, of *any* operating system is >> set up to handle them. > > Yes, as I said there are two separate problems. I really think that > a standardized virtual driver interface should be modeled after > kernel <-> user interfaces, not hardware <-> kernel interfaces. > > Once we know what operations we want (e.g. read, write and SIGIO, > or some other set of primitives), it will be good to provide a > virtual PCI device that can be used as one transport mechanism > below it. Using PCI device IDs to tell what functionality is > provided by the device would provide a reasonable method for > autoprobing. > That seems like a reasonable approach. I *do* care about hardware-equivalent interfaces, because they, too, keep getting reinvented, but it seems reasonable to approach it in a layered fashion like you describe. -hpa _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
