Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v6 0/6] Virtio refactoring.

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:30:20PM +0100, KONRAD Frédéric wrote:
> On 18/12/2012 12:01, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 10:33:37AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >>On 17 December 2012 15:45, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>>Is the point to allow virtio-mmio?  Why can't virtio-mmio be just
> >>>another bus, like a pci bus, and another binding, like the virtio-pci
> >>>binding?
> >>(a) the current code is really not very nice because it's not
> >>actually a proper set of QOM/qdev devices
> >>(b) unlike PCI, you can't create sysbus devices on the
> >>command line, because they don't correspond to a user
> >>pluggable bit of hardware. We don't want users to have to know
> >>an address and IRQ number for each virtio-mmio device (especially
> >>since these are board specific); instead the board can create
> >>and wire up transport devices wherever is suitable, and the
> >>user just creates the backend (which is plugged into the virtio bus).
> >>
> >>-- PMM
> >This is what I am saying: create your own bus and put
> >your devices there. Allocate resources when you init
> >a device.
> >
> >Instead you seem to want to expose a virtio device as two devices to
> >user - if true this is not reasonable.
> >
> The modifications will be transparent to the user, as we will keep
> virtio-x-pci devices.

Then what's the point of all this?

-device virtio-pci,id=transport1 -device virtio-net,bus=transport1

or

-device virtio-mmio,id=transport1 -device virtio-net,bus=transport1

Is simply an insane way to create a network device.

-- 
MST