From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=57232 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PJ2sn-0006dh-UA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 06:42:31 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PJ2sl-0001IF-CD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 06:42:29 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:13623) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PJ2sk-0001I7-Ud for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 06:42:27 -0500 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oAIBgQDY008733 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 06:42:26 -0500 Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:42:25 +0200 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/3] add hotplug opt-out option for devices. Message-ID: <20101118114225.GH7948@redhat.com> References: <1290077118-11577-1-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com> <20101118110113.GE7948@redhat.com> <4CE50A51.1080209@redhat.com> <20101118112043.GG7948@redhat.com> <4CE50E03.1020907@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4CE50E03.1020907@redhat.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gerd Hoffmann Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:29:07PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > On 11/18/10 12:20, Gleb Natapov wrote: > >On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:13:21PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > >>On 11/18/10 12:01, Gleb Natapov wrote: > >>>On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:45:15AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>>This patch series adds a qdev flag which allows devices being tagged as > >>>>not hotpluggable. It also sets this flag for a number of devices. > >>>> > >>>Do we want to be able to mark device as not hot-unpluggable from command > >>>like too? Something like this -device blabla,notunplug=no. > >> > >>Hmm, dunno. Do you have a example where this would be needed or useful? > >> > >Dunno me too. Windows allows to eject any hot-unpluggable device to any > >user and in the past we got requirement to disable this and had to build > >two BIOSes one with cpu hot-plug support another without. So > >hot-pluggability of device looks like management decision (along with > >technical one if device can't be actually unplugged). > > For *that* use case well have to do a bit more like dynamically > building the acpi table which indicates which slots are > hot-pluggable and which are not. Which indeed would be useful and > would fix the windows xp offering me to unplug the piix chipset in > the "savely remove hardware" menu ;) > Yes, but management has to specify to us somehow that certain device is not hotpluggable and notunplug=no looks like good way to do it. > But I suspect it also isn't exactly trivial and way behind the scope > of this little patch set ... > If it is not trivial I will not insist. -- Gleb.