From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965837AbXDBUbO (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2007 16:31:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965829AbXDBUbL (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2007 16:31:11 -0400 Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com ([171.71.176.117]:28153 "EHLO sj-iport-6.cisco.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965823AbXDBUbJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2007 16:31:09 -0400 To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , mathiasen@gmail.com Subject: Re: A set of "standard" virtual devices? X-Message-Flag: Warning: May contain useful information References: <4611652F.700@zytor.com> From: Roland Dreier Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 13:31:07 -0700 In-Reply-To: <4611652F.700@zytor.com> (H. Peter Anvin's message of "Mon, 02 Apr 2007 13:18:55 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.19 (linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Apr 2007 20:31:08.0044 (UTC) FILETIME=[D81044C0:01C77565] Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=rdreier@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; ); Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I would therefore like to propose that the Linux Foundation register a > PCI ID for use by LANANA ($3000/year), and we set up a LANANA registry > for these device IDs, together with a description of the device > interface each of them expect. Similarly, a Subsystem ID registry can > be used (for virtualization vendors which don't have their own VID > already) to distinguish different implementations. Sounds like a very good idea. > Obviously, anyone who adheres to the published interface can use one > of these VID:DIDs -- as far as I'm concerned, even hardware vendors; > we'll use the SID to distinguish between implementations. I think for this to work, some attempt at a conformance testing program is required... - R.