On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 5:20 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 01, 2018 at 05:13:10AM -0400, Si-Wei Liu wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_net.h b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_net.h
>> index aa40664..0827b7e 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_net.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_net.h
>> @@ -80,6 +80,8 @@ struct virtio_net_config {
>> __u16 max_virtqueue_pairs;
>> /* Default maximum transmit unit advice */
>> __u16 mtu;
>> + /* Device at bus:slot.function backed up by virtio_net */
>> + __u16 bsf2backup;
>> } __attribute__((packed));
>
> I'm not sure this is a good interface. This isn't unique even on some
> PCI systems, not to speak of non-PCI ones.
Are you suggesting adding PCI address domain besides to make it
universally unique? And what the non-PCI device you envisioned that
the main target, essetially live migration, can/should cover? Or is
there better option in your mind already?
Thanks,
-Siwei
>
>> /*
>> --
>> 1.8.3.1
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
