From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MOJsp-0004P9-HR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:15:31 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MOJsk-0004L3-Nv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:15:30 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52251 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MOJsk-0004Ky-Hl
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:15:26 -0400
Received: from mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.49]:19667)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>) id 1MOJsk-000066-4C
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:15:26 -0400
Received: from aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35])
	by mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com
	(InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id
	<20090707231524.QLXN5579.mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com>
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 00:15:24 +0100
Received: from miranda.arrow ([213.107.24.213])
	by aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com
	(InterMail vG.2.02.00.01 201-2161-120-102-20060912) with ESMTP id
	<20090707231524.GJYJ13254.aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@miranda.arrow>
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 00:15:24 +0100
Received: from sdb by miranda.arrow with local (Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>) id 1MOJsg-0001eG-Vt
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:15:23 +0100
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 00:15:22 +0100
From: Stuart Brady <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] ATAPI pass through v2
Message-ID: <20090707231522.GA6326@miranda.arrow>
References: <200907011931.53521.alexandre.bique@citrix.com>
	<20090707200327.GA3902@miranda.arrow>
	<5d3bb3090907071421i506a2f0bh5aca170c35a26f62@mail.gmail.com>
	<200907072344.33893.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<5d3bb3090907071550s6e832c45k804bca769aa57f70@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A53D3B1.2020903@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4A53D3B1.2020903@codemonkey.ws>
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

On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 06:01:05PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> 
> No need for a switch IMHO.  If a user is doing pass through, they ought 
> to expect that the guest has direct access to the device.

Of course, if passthrough were to be done by default, the user might be
forgiven for being unaware of this...
-- 
Stuart Brady