From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51032) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c9w9P-00019s-2u for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:41:27 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c9w9J-0001oi-HR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:41:27 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:24188) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c9w9J-0001o4-B6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:41:21 -0500 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 314D09D1D7 for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 15:41:20 +0000 (UTC) From: Markus Armbruster References: <1479777133-23567-1-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com> <47c2fb2a-7785-b7b9-bf7d-5743cbc5f4be@redhat.com> <20161123173515.GB27297@thinpad.lan.raisama.net> <871sy1f1de.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:41:16 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Marcel Apfelbaum's message of "Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:22:12 +0200") Message-ID: <878ts8ans3.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 00/15] qmp: Report supported device types on 'query-machines' List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Marcel Apfelbaum Cc: Eduardo Habkost , libvir-list@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Laine Stump , "Michael S. Tsirkin" Marcel Apfelbaum writes: > On 11/24/2016 03:34 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Eduardo Habkost writes: >> >>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 06:43:16PM +0200, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: >>>> On 11/22/2016 03:11 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >>>>> The Problem >>> > > [...] > >> Our decision to have hybrid PCI/PCIe devices and buses breeds >> considerable complexity. I wish we had avoided them, but I believe it's >> too late to change now. >> >>>> This still does not solve the problem that some devices makes >>>> sense only on a specific arch. >> > > Hi Markus, > >> Examples? >> > > One quick example would be that we don't want to see > Intel's IOH 3420 PCIe Root Port in an ARM machine, > or a pxb on a Q35 machine (in this case we want pxb-pcie) Such a device would be weird. But would it be wrong? Wrong enough for QEMU to reject it? Unless QEMU rejects it, there's no reason not to list it as pluggable. > I do believe there are other examples, I'll try to think of more. > > Thanks, > Marcel > > [...]