From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MGDie-0004Z2-RC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:03:32 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MGDiZ-0004XJ-Ni
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:03:31 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=58624 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MGDiY-0004X8-Qb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:03:27 -0400
Received: from mail-qy0-f191.google.com ([209.85.221.191]:54189)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1MGDiY-0004bu-BD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:03:26 -0400
Received: by qyk29 with SMTP id 29so4646752qyk.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:03:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4A3662BA.6030304@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:03:22 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Configuration vs. compat hints [was Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv3
	03/13] qemu: add routines to manage PCI capabilities]
References: <4A3636FA.1040609@redhat.com> <20090615124101.GH6351@redhat.com>
	<4A364381.401@redhat.com> <4A364401.6010500@codemonkey.ws>
	<4A3647FB.9010808@redhat.com> <4A364B53.9080007@codemonkey.ws>
	<4A364FE0.40204@redhat.com> <4A3651EB.3070204@codemonkey.ws>
	<4A36555A.4090303@redhat.com> <4A3659A0.3050108@codemonkey.ws>
	<20090615143737.GB14405@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090615143737.GB14405@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>, dlaor@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Mark McLoughlin <markmc@redhat.com>, Glauber Costa <glommer@redhat.com>, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>

Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> I'm not at all arguing against pci_addr.  I'm arguing about how libvirt  
>> should use it with respect to the "genesis" use-case where libvirt has  
>> no specific reason to choose one PCI slot over another.  In that case,  
>> I'm merely advocating that we want to let QEMU make the decision.
>>     
>
> The allocation code could be moved out into a library, and libvirt could
> link with it (ducks).
>   

Why does libvirt want to do allocation?

Regards,

Anthony Liguori