From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] virtio-pci: add MMIO property Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 19:39:23 -0500 Message-ID: <4F67D1BB.7060802@us.ibm.com> References: <20120319155650.GA6430@redhat.com> <4F6786C5.3080902@codemonkey.ws> <20120319204952.GA9747@redhat.com> <4F67A021.6040601@us.ibm.com> <20120319212916.GC9747@redhat.com> <4F67AF72.8080905@codemonkey.ws> <877gygqhbp.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Anthony Liguori , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Kardashevskiy , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, avi@redhat.com To: Rusty Russell Return-path: Received: from e3.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.143]:41368 "EHLO e3.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757729Ab2CTAja (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:39:30 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e3.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:39:29 -0400 Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by d01dlp01.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49FAB38C8054 for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:39:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id q2K0dQ8u344834 for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 20:39:26 -0400 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id q2K0dO65019753 for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 18:39:25 -0600 In-Reply-To: <877gygqhbp.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/19/2012 06:52 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 17:13:06 -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>> Maybe just make this a hidden option like x-miio? >> >> x-violate-the-virtio-spec-to-trick-old-linux-drivers-into-working-on-power? > > "To configure the device, we use the first I/O region of the PCI > device." > > Meh, it does sound a little like we are specifying that it's an PCI I/O > bar. > > Let's resurrect the PCI-v2 idea, which is ready to implement now, and a > nice cleanup? Detach it from the change-of-ring-format idea which is > turning out to be a tarpit. I think that's a sensible approach. Regards, Anthony Liguori > Thanks, > Rusty.