Re: PCI Pass-through in Xen ARM - Draft 2.

[Manish Jaggi <mjaggi@caviumnetworks.com>]

On 31/07/15 8:26 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 31/07/15 15:33, Manish Jaggi wrote:
>> Hi Julien,
>>
>> On 31/07/15 6:29 pm, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> Hi Manish,
>>>
>>> On 31/07/15 13:50, Manish Jaggi wrote:
>>>> Ok, i will implement the same from pciback to toolstack. I am not sure
>>>> about the complexity but will give it a try.
>>>> With this xen-pciback will not create the vdev-X entry at all.
>>> Can you send a new draft before continuing to implement PCI support in
>>> Xen?
>> I am working on the Draft 3 and addressing comments in draft 2. I am
>> doing a feasibility of the stuff I put in draft3.
> Well, I don't think that anything we say within this thread was
> impossible to do.
>
>>> As long as we are not agree about it,
>> I thought I was trying to discuss the same. If you have any point please
>> raise it.
> What I meant is, this is a 40-messages thread with lots of discussions
> on it.
>
> A new draft containing a summary on what was said would benefits
> everyone and help us to get on a design that we think is good.
>
>>>    you loose your time trying to
>>> implement something that can drastically change in the next revision.
>> I am only putting the stuff in the Draft3 which *can* be implemented later.
> But nothing prevent someone in the discussion on Draft3 to say this is
> wrong and it has to be done in a different way.
>
> Usually the time between two draft should be pretty short in order to
> get sane base for discussion. For now, we are talking about small
> portion of design and speculating/trying to remember what was agreed on
> other sub-thread.
ok will send draft 3 with the points on this topic as under discussion. 
Is that fine?
>
> Regards,
>