"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:33:31AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: >> OK. Well, Anthony wants qemu to be robust in this regard, so I am >> tempted to rework all the qemu drivers to handle arbitrary layouts. >> They could use a good audit anyway. > > I agree here. Still trying to understand whether we can agree to use > a feature bit for this, or not. I'd *like* to imply it by the new PCI layout, but if it doesn't work we'll add a new feature bit. I'm resisting a feature bit, since it constrains future implementations which could otherwise assume it. >> This would become a glaring exception, but I'm tempted to fix it to 32 >> bytes at the same time as we get the new pci layout (ie. for the virtio >> 1.0 spec). > > But this isn't a virtio-pci only issue, is it? > qemu has s390 bus with same limmitation. > How can we tie it to pci layout? They can use a transport feature if they need to, of course. But perhaps the timing with ccw will coincide with the fix, in which they don't need to, but it might be a bit late. Cornelia? Cheers, Rusty. _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
