From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Gibson Subject: Re: kvm PCI assignment & VFIO ramblings Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:29:48 +1000 Message-ID: <20110830012948.GD4254@yookeroo.fritz.box> References: <20110826193559.GD13060@sequoia.sous-sol.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Alexey Kardashevskiy , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , Paul Mackerras , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , Alexander Graf , qemu-devel , Chris Wright , iommu , Avi Kivity , "Roedel, Joerg" , linuxppc-dev , "benve@cisco.com" To: Aaron Fabbri Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel=gmane.org@nongnu.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org eOn Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 01:17:05PM -0700, Aaron Fabbri wrote: [snip] > Yes. In essence, I'd rather not have to run any other admin processes. > Doing things programmatically, on the fly, from each process, is the > cleanest model right now. The "persistent group" model doesn't necessarily prevent that. There's no reason your program can't use the administrative interface as well as the "use" interface, and I don't see that making the admin interface separate and persistent makes this any harder. -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson