From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [PATCH] QEMU as non-root and PCI passthrough do not mix Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:29:55 -0500 Message-ID: <20160115142955.GD19934@localhost.localdomain> References: <1452767992.2185.16.camel@citrix.com> <22167.56371.959459.28123@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: Wei Liu , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Ian Jackson , Ian Campbell List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 02:14:40PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jan 2016, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Stefano Stabellini writes ("Re: [PATCH] QEMU as non-root and PCI passthrough do not mix"): > > > On Thu, 14 Jan 2016, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > > What if b_info->device_model_user is NULL or == "root"? Doesn't this warn > > > > even then? > > > > > > I meant to warn even if device_model_user is NULL because it is the > > > default and I think it is fair to inform the user about this. But I > > > think you are right that we don't want to warn if device_model_user is > > > specified as "root". > > > > Much of the logic here is upended by what is now my qemu privsep > > series. Is it really worth fine-tuning the default handling here ? > > Fair enough. > > Do you prefer the PCI passthrough case to be fixed now or after your > series? In other words, do you prefer this patch to go in now, or after > your series? I hadn't chance to look at the patch but I was wondering if we also take into account the pci-assign and pci-detach on a guest that booted without PCI passthrough?