From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=56282 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PAluU-0003sE-JJ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:58:13 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1PAlgE-0007Jj-A2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:43:19 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:20635)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1PAlgE-0007JV-3d
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:43:18 -0400
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 17:43:13 +0200
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/5] boot order specification
Message-ID: <20101026154313.GC2764@redhat.com>
References: <1288090091-25874-1-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com>
	<AANLkTincyVcoVTXCDTM8q43g=NdVcGYenTJtSejUmeWZ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTincyVcoVTXCDTM8q43g=NdVcGYenTJtSejUmeWZ@mail.gmail.com>
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 03:35:38PM +0000, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com> wrote:
> > This is current sate of the patch series for people to comment on.
> > I dropped ioport double reservation checking from isa-bus and added
> > bus_id field for IDE bus since as Markus pointed out unit has different
> > meaning there.
> >
> > This patch series produce names like:
> >
> > ISA@03f1-03f5,03f7/fd@a
> > ISA@03f1-03f5,03f7/fd@b
> > PCI@0000:00:01.1/IDE@1:0
> > PCI@0000:00:01.1/IDE@1:1
> > PCI@0000:00:03.0/virtio-blk@0
> > PCI@0000:00:04.0/virtio-net@0
> >
> > They will be passed to BIOS to determine boot order.
> 
> We also use OpenBIOS for PPC and Sparcs. A compatible boot device for
> those would be OpenFirmware tree name. I think your names should then
> become:
> /pci/isa/fdc@3f1/fd@0
> /pci/isa/fdc@3f1/fd@1
Why is it PCI?

> /pci/ide@0/1,0
> /pci/ide@0/1,1
Where pci address here?

> /pci/virtio-net@1
> /pci/virtio-net@2
And here?

And we will need to describe ROMs too. I planned to have something like:
ROM@romfilename for roms loaded with -option-rom command line option.

> 
> The PCI addressing scheme in OF was a bit twisty, I just invented
> integers in place of those.
> 
> Anyway, I don't think we should invent yet another device path naming system.
IS this format documented somewhere? I am not attached to specific
format at all.

--
			Gleb.