From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1L0l1h-0004iF-An
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:51:01 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1L0l1f-0004he-RX
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:51:00 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47611 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L0l1f-0004ha-Hf
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:50:59 -0500
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]:36269)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <paul@codesourcery.com>) id 1L0l1f-0007AO-0G
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 17:50:59 -0500
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/5] Re-factor nic model listing
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:50:47 +0000
References: <> <200811131835.08529.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<491C83EA.9060904@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <491C83EA.9060904@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200811132250.48496.paul@codesourcery.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Mark McLoughlin <markmc@redhat.com>

On Thursday 13 November 2008, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Paul Brook wrote:
> > On Thursday 13 November 2008, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> >>      .desc = "ARM Versatile/PB (ARM926EJ-S)",
> >>      .init = vpb_init,
> >>      .use_scsi = 1,
> >> +    .nic_models = pci_nic_models,
> >
> > This is wrong, an I'd expect a lot of the other non-PC machines are too.
>
> What's the issue?  This board seems to have a PCI bridge attached to it
> so why can't it support any PCI nic?  Is this just not something that
> occurs naturally?

For the same reason you mentioned separately: The abstraction is all wrong. 
These boards also support various non-pci NICs. Admittedly this is a 
pre-existing bug, but if we're changing things it makes sense to get it 
right.

Paul