From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:57675) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TkvNT-0002t1-HV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 06:30:28 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TkvNS-0004qS-EZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 06:30:27 -0500 Received: from greensocs.com ([87.106.252.221]:45312 helo=s15328186.onlinehome-server.info) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TkvNS-0004pD-7x for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 06:30:26 -0500 Message-ID: <50D053CC.9040203@greensocs.com> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 12:30:20 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?KONRAD_Fr=E9d=E9ric?= MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1354887155-32281-1-git-send-email-fred.konrad@greensocs.com> <20121217154508.GA28712@redhat.com> <20121218110153.GC22586@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20121218110153.GC22586@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v6 0/6] Virtio refactoring. List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Peter Maydell , aliguori@us.ibm.com, e.voevodin@samsung.com, mark.burton@greensocs.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, afaerber@suse.de 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 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.