From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49044) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WGOfc-0004Gm-8Z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 03:07:54 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WGOfW-00069o-93 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 03:07:48 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60862) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WGOfW-00069h-1V for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 03:07:42 -0500 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s1K87cU1006425 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 03:07:39 -0500 Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 10:12:35 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20140220081235.GA28812@redhat.com> References: <1392841255-22741-1-git-send-email-bsd@redhat.com> <1392841255-22741-2-git-send-email-bsd@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1392841255-22741-2-git-send-email-bsd@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2 v2] pci: change default value of rom_bar to 2 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Bandan Das Cc: Alex Williamson , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 03:20:54PM -0500, Bandan Das wrote: > The following patch depends on the value of rom_bar to > determine rom blacklist behavior. Existing code shouldn't > be affected by changing the default value of rom_bar since > all relevant decisions only rely on whether rom_bar is zero > or non-zero. > > Signed-off-by: Bandan Das > --- > hw/pci/pci.c | 7 ++++++- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/hw/pci/pci.c b/hw/pci/pci.c > index 4e0701d..12c3e27 100644 > --- a/hw/pci/pci.c > +++ b/hw/pci/pci.c > @@ -53,7 +53,12 @@ static void pci_bus_finalize(Object *obj); > static Property pci_props[] = { > DEFINE_PROP_PCI_DEVFN("addr", PCIDevice, devfn, -1), > DEFINE_PROP_STRING("romfile", PCIDevice, romfile), > - DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("rombar", PCIDevice, rom_bar, 1), > + /* > + * 0 = disable > + * 1 = user requested on, force loading even if rom blacklisted > + * 2 = enabled but disables loading of blacklisted roms (default) > + */ > + DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("rombar", PCIDevice, rom_bar, 2), How do users figure out this interface? Read code? Could we add a bit property rombarforce=on/off instead? Seems better. Maybe we should teach bool type visitors about 0 and 1 being legal values (call out to int visitor, then check value 0 or 1), then rombar can be changed to bit property too. Also, this will need QMP support right? IIUC rombar is not exposed in QMP ATM. > DEFINE_PROP_BIT("multifunction", PCIDevice, cap_present, > QEMU_PCI_CAP_MULTIFUNCTION_BITNR, false), > DEFINE_PROP_BIT("command_serr_enable", PCIDevice, cap_present, > -- > 1.8.3.1