From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965963AbXDBVmy (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2007 17:42:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965962AbXDBVmy (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2007 17:42:54 -0400 Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:34263 "EHLO mail.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965963AbXDBVmw (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2007 17:42:52 -0400 Message-ID: <461178D9.402@goop.org> Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 14:42:49 -0700 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andi Kleen CC: Jeff Garzik , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , Virtualization Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , mathiasen@gmail.com Subject: Re: A set of "standard" virtual devices? References: <4611652F.700@zytor.com> <200704022312.39195.ak@suse.de> <4611768D.1080801@garzik.org> <200704022336.43136.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <200704022336.43136.ak@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andi Kleen wrote: > The implementation wouldn't need to use PCI at all. There wouldn't > even need to be PCI like registers internally. Just a pci device > with an ID somewhere in sysfs. PCI with unique IDs > is just a convenient and well established key into the driver module > collection. Once you have the right driver it can do what it wants. But I understood hpa's suggestion to mean that there would be a standard PCI interface for a hardware RNG, and a single linux driver for that device, which all hypervisors would be expected to implement. But that's only reasonable if the virtualization environment has some notion of PCI to expose to the Linux guest. J