From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59741) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W0w9c-0002cI-BW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:38:58 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W0w9W-0002ac-1Q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:38:52 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:24533) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W0w9V-0002a4-Ph for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:38:45 -0500 Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 18:38:39 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20140108163839.GB16822@redhat.com> References: <1388934290-27700-1-git-send-email-mmishael@redhat.com> <52CC1310.7070406@redhat.com> <52CD78C4.8070403@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52CD78C4.8070403@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Docs: Introduce multiport serial support in qemupciserial.inf List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Yan Vugenfirer , qemu-devel list , Ronen Hod , Gerd Hoffmann , Anthony Liguori , Dmitry Fleytman , Miki Mishael On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 05:11:48PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 08/01/2014 16:07, Yan Vugenfirer ha scritto: > >>> > >>> +%QEMU-PCI_SERIAL_1_PORT%=ComPort_inst1, > >>> PCI\VEN_1B36&DEV_0002&SUBSYS_11001AF4&REV_01 > >>> +%QEMU-PCI_SERIAL_2_PORT%=ComPort_inst2, > >>> PCI\VEN_1B36&DEV_0003&SUBSYS_11001AF4&REV_01 > >>> +%QEMU-PCI_SERIAL_4_PORT%=ComPort_inst4, > >>> PCI\VEN_1B36&DEV_0004&SUBSYS_11001AF4&REV_01 > >> > >> I think checking the subsystem is not necessary (and I think downstreams > >> could legitimately change it). Can you check CC and REV but not SUBSYS? > > > > PNP ID can be reduced to vendor and device ID only, for example: > > PCI\VEN_1B36&DEV_0002 . But in this case we cannot check revision. > > Gerd, Michael, what do you think is better? Not check revision, or > enforcing subsystem? > > Paolo AFAIK the 0.9.X spec explicitly says you should look at subsystem. -- MST