From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=38768 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PARRI-0004NY-AH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 14:06:44 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PARQy-0002kx-7d for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 14:06:13 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35088) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PARQy-0002ks-0A for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 14:06:12 -0400 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o9PI6BQO001747 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 14:06:11 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 20:06:10 +0200 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Add get_dev_path callback to ISA bus. Message-ID: <20101025180610.GA877@redhat.com> References: <1287928933-11423-1-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <20101025170007.GC31633@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Markus Armbruster Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 07:53:41PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Gleb Natapov writes: > > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 05:10:15PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > >> Gleb Natapov writes: > >> > >> > PCI bus already has one. For ISA bus this patch series uses device's > >> > ioports to uniquely describe it. For isa-ide, for example, get_dev_path > >> > method returns: > >> > 01f0-01f7,03f6 for first IDE controller > >> > 0170-0177,0376 for second one > >> > >> Any I/O port used by the device identifies it. I'd say a common > >> identifier is the "I/O base", the lowest I/O port used. > > So use only first port from the string. More information is better then > > less information. You can always drop information you do not need. > > I'd prefer canonical bus addresses to be terse. It's not the place to > give additional information. I'd prefer them to give full info but not more. I don't see why you point is more valid then mine. -- Gleb.