From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Don Slutz Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] Add vmware_hw to xl.cfg Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 06:59:52 -0400 Message-ID: <5406F4A8.5040000@terremark.com> References: <1409585629-25840-1-git-send-email-dslutz@verizon.com> <1409585629-25840-2-git-send-email-dslutz@verizon.com> <54058DC3020000780002FB1D@mail.emea.novell.com> <54060B5C.30205@terremark.com> <5406E32802000078000300E2@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5406E32802000078000300E2@mail.emea.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: Tim Deegan , Kevin Tian , Keir Fraser , Ian Campbell , Stefano Stabellini , Jun Nakajima , Andrew Cooper , Ian Jackson , Don Slutz , xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Eddie Dong , Aravind Gopalakrishnan , Suravee Suthikulpanit , Boris Ostrovsky List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 09/03/14 03:45, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 02.09.14 at 20:24, wrote: >> On 09/02/14 03:28, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 01.09.14 at 17:33, wrote: >>>> @@ -149,8 +152,11 @@ void pci_setup(void) >>>> pci_writew(devfn, 0x20, 0x0000); /* No smb bus IO enable */ >>>> pci_writew(devfn, 0xd2, 0x0000); /* No smb bus IO enable */ >>>> pci_writew(devfn, 0x22, 0x0000); >>>> - pci_writew(devfn, 0x3c, 0x0009); /* Hardcoded IRQ9 */ >>>> - pci_writew(devfn, 0x3d, 0x0001); >>>> + if ( !vmware_hw ) >>>> + { >>>> + pci_writew(devfn, 0x3c, 0x0009); /* Hardcoded IRQ9 */ >>>> + pci_writew(devfn, 0x3d, 0x0001); >>>> + } >>> This needs an explanation (it is merely being mentioned in the >>> description). >> Ok, how does this comment sound: >> >> /* >> * When looking more like VMware, let the guest pick the >> * PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE (0x3c) and the PCI_INTERRUPT_PIN(3d) >> * instead of them being hardcoded. This allows for example >> * lscpci in the guest to match for "PIIX4 ACPI PM" what >> * one gets on VMware. >> */ > The first sentence is just stating verbally what the code does, i.e. > pretty pointless. The second sentence - at least to me - doesn't > explain anything (to a large part perhaps because having lspci > produce identical output with real VMware is rather secondary a > goal imo). I can agree on it being a secondary goal, and so will drop it. I just remembered that the better statement: Attempt to reduce windows reactivations by making the hardware look as much like VMware's. I am fine with delaying this to 4.6 time frame. -Don Slutz > Jan >