From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42071)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <cohuck@redhat.com>) id 1eJgr8-000829-Aj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 09:27:27 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <cohuck@redhat.com>) id 1eJgr5-0000f0-4z
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 09:27:26 -0500
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 15:27:18 +0100
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20171128152718.229a20fe.cohuck@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <6513d1c5-032e-b9d0-3dab-f2d0bd337ae2@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <20171128134648.21530-1-cohuck@redhat.com>
	<6513d1c5-032e-b9d0-3dab-f2d0bd337ae2@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/2] s390x: cut down on unattached
 devices
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: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, pmorel@linux.vnet.ibm.com

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 15:17:38 +0100
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> On 11/28/2017 02:46 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > info qom-tree shows several devices under unattached that probably
> > should go somewhere.  
> 
> I think this was reported by me. See 
> MID: <76f95c6f-641e-2fe0-73b4-3ab24fc1a93f@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> I would not mind a Reported-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com>.
> Or do you see this differently?

Apparently I forgot to add it to the first one. Will do.

> 
> If these are bugs. I would prefer commit messages and titles reflecting
> this fact.

I don't see this as fixing bugs, more removing oddities.

> 
> Otherwise at first glance both patches seem sane.

Can I count this as an ack, or do you plan to do more review?

> 
> Regards,
> Halil
> 
> > 
> > The css bridge should attach to the machine, as it has a similar
> > purpose as e.g. a pci host bridge.
> > 
> > The autogenerated network devices should be in the same bucket as any
> > other device; I'm just not sure about the way I went about it.
> > 
> > The zpci devices are still problematic: I don't have a good idea where
> > they should show up.
> > 
> > Remaining in the unattached container are the sysbus, memory regions
> > and cpus.
> > 
> > Cornelia Huck (2):
> >   s390x/css: attach css bridge
> >   s390x: attach autogenerated nics
> > 
> >  hw/s390x/css-bridge.c      | 2 ++
> >  hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 2 ++
> >  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >   
>