From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Subject: Re: Configuration vs. compat hints [was Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv3
 03/13] qemu: add routines to manage PCI capabilities]
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 07:41:03 -0500
Message-ID: <4A36415F.6080206@codemonkey.ws>
References: <20090610150129.GC28601@redhat.com>	 <200906101624.30659.paul@codesourcery.com>	 <20090610174301.GC7416@shareable.org> <20090610182227.GN28601@redhat.com>	 <20090610192702.GH7416@shareable.org> <1244796209.16425.20.camel@blaa>	 <4A326B5C.5010501@codemonkey.ws> <1244821292.30522.56.camel@blaa>	 <4A327E4A.7010300@codemonkey.ws> <1244825303.26769.19.camel@blaa>	 <20090614095016.GA7560@redhat.com> <1245056916.6891.31.camel@blaa> <4A3613EC.6030608@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Mark McLoughlin <markmc@redhat.com>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
	Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>,
	Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	Glauber Costa <glommer@redhat.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-qy0-f173.google.com ([209.85.221.173]:60150 "EHLO
	mail-qy0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751727AbZFOMlF (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:41:05 -0400
Received: by qyk3 with SMTP id 3so227059qyk.33
        for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 05:41:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4A3613EC.6030608@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 06/15/2009 12:08 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>>> This last option makes sense to me: in a real world the user has
>>> control over where he places the device on the bus, so why
>>> not with qemu?
>>>      
>>
>> Yep, most people seem to agree that it makes sense to allow this, but
>> some believe it should only be via a machine description file, not the
>> command line.
>>    
>
> I don't understand this opposition.  It's clear a machine config file 
> is a long way in our future.  It's also clear lack of stable PCI 
> addresses hurts us now.

Is there opposition?  I don't ever recall seeing a patch...

I think it's a perfectly fine idea.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori