From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38543)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1VQfxa-0004bR-Ff
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:04:40 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1VQfxU-0001NB-Ey
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:04:34 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53154)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1VQfxU-0001N4-59
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:04:28 -0400
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:06:47 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20130930160647.GE10306@redhat.com>
References: <524162DE.1080705@redhat.com> <20130925070116.GA5436@redhat.com>
	<1380098908.1968.30.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87txh62nyz.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<20130928181241.GA617@redhat.com>
	<8761tiiqfw.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<20130930104855.GD20445@redhat.com>
	<1380556877.3922.48.camel@nilsson.home.kraxel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1380556877.3922.48.camel@nilsson.home.kraxel.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Attaching PCI devices to the PCIe root complex
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>, marcel.a@redhat.com, qemu list <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, Laine Stump <laine@redhat.com>, Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>

On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 06:01:17PM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>   Hi,
> 
> > Yes but, same as in the initial design,
> > it really makes it user's problem.
> > 
> > So we'd have
> > virtio-net-pci-conventional
> > virtio-net-pci-express
> > virtio-net-pci-integrated
> > 
> > 
> > All this while users just really want to say "virtio"
> > (that's the expert user, what most people want is for guest to be faster).
> 
> And for the actual device emulation it makes almost no difference.  xhci
> exists in express and integrated variants too.  The qemu-emulated device
> calls pcie_endpoint_cap_init() unconditionally, so the express endpoint
> capability shows up even if you plug it into the root bus.  That should
> be handled better.  But I think that would be the only difference in the
> xhci code.  And even that could be handled in the pci core, for example
> by making pcie_endpoint_cap_init a nop unless the device is actually is
> a express endpoint from the bus topology point of view.
> 
> Maybe PCIDeviceClass->is_express should move to PCIDevice and
> PCIDeviceClass should get a supports_express field instead.
> 
> cheers,
>   Gerd

Not sure why do you need is_express in PCIDevice.
We already have QEMU_PCI_CAP_EXPRESS set in cap_present.