From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: Other PCI devices to mark mark as read-only for dom0 Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:30:08 +0100 Message-ID: <4FE46550.20300@citrix.com> References: <4FE43518.9070106@citrix.com> <4FE45A64020000780008B570@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <4FE44404.2020702@citrix.com> <4FE471C4020000780008B5FA@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <4FE45FD3.3060300@citrix.com> <4FE47F28020000780008B686@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4FE47F28020000780008B686@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Andre Przywara , Christoph Egger , "Keir (Xen.org)" , Eddie Dong , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , Wei Wang , "xiantao.zhang@intel.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 22/06/12 13:20, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> Because, just like for normal, non-PCI based serial ones, ports >>> that Xen doesn't use should remain usable by Dom0. For >>> example, I have a PCI card with two serial and one parallel >>> ports, so with Xen using one serial port for itself, there's no >>> reason not to allow Dom0 to use the other or the parallel one. >> I apologize. I originally used the term 'device' when I intended to use >> 'function', so I think we are arguing for the same point. > And I understood you meaning so - from a PCI terminology pov. > Multi-function here, however, means multiple serial/parallel ports > within a single PCI function (PCI_CLASS_COMMUNICATION_MULTISERIAL > or PCI_CLASS_COMMUNICATION_OTHER). Hence we shouldn't hide a > full S:B:D.F just because we use some portion of it. > > Jan > Ah right. Yes. Perhaps then a warning on the Xen console if Xen encounters such a device. -- Andrew Cooper - Dom0 Kernel Engineer, Citrix XenServer T: +44 (0)1223 225 900, http://www.citrix.com