From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56877) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1X23kh-0006CZ-63 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 Jul 2014 15:30:07 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1X23kc-0006Q4-D6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 Jul 2014 15:30:03 -0400 Received: from smtp.citrix.com ([66.165.176.89]:40327) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1X23kc-0006Pm-8K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 01 Jul 2014 15:29:58 -0400 Message-ID: <53B30BFF.4020702@citrix.com> Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 15:29:03 -0400 From: Ross Philipson MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <53B0D0C5.60000@intel.com> <20140630064822.GB14491@redhat.com> <53B110CA.6070606@intel.com> <20140630090511.GB15777@redhat.com> <53B1BAF9.6040800@citrix.com> <20140701053907.GA6108@redhat.com> <20140701170206.GB7640@redhat.com> <53B2F238.7000009@citrix.com> <20140701180625.GC7640@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20140701180625.GC7640@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Xen-devel] [v5][PATCH 0/5] xen: add Intel IGD passthrough support List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: "peter.maydell@linaro.org" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "Allen M. Kay" , "Kelly.Zytaruk@amd.com" , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Anthony Perard , Stefano Stabellini , "anthony@codemonkey.ws" , "Chen, Tiejun" , "yang.z.zhang@intel.com" , Paolo Bonzini On 07/01/2014 02:06 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 01:39:04PM -0400, Ross Philipson wrote: [snip] > > What class does your ISA bridge device have? #define PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_ISA 0x0601 > >>> >>>> Also I don't like the idea of tying Tiejun's patch series, that covers a >>>> very narrow use case, to something as important and general purpose as >>>> upgrading chipset. >>> >>> If it's true that implementing igd passthrough on top of q35 is much >>> cleaner architecturally, then I don't see why we should merge a stop-gap >>> solution that we'll need to then support indefinitely. >>> >>> We are talking about upstreaming functionality that xen already has, right? >>> So there's no time to market concern, whoever wants a solution today >>> has it. Why not do it in the cleanest possible way? >>> >> >> >> -- >> Ross Philipson > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2014.0.4592 / Virus Database: 3986/7769 - Release Date: 06/30/14 > -- Ross Philipson