Arnd Bergmann wrote:
That being said, on platforms which are PCI-centric, such as x86, this
of course makes it a lot easier to produce virtual devices which work
across hypervisors, since the device model, of *any* operating system is
set up to handle them.
Yes, as I said there are two separate problems. I really think that
a standardized virtual driver interface should be modeled after
kernel <-> user interfaces, not hardware <-> kernel interfaces.
Once we know what operations we want (e.g. read, write and SIGIO,
or some other set of primitives), it will be good to provide a
virtual PCI device that can be used as one transport mechanism
below it. Using PCI device IDs to tell what functionality is
provided by the device would provide a reasonable method for
autoprobing.
That seems like a reasonable approach. I *do* care about
hardware-equivalent interfaces, because they, too, keep getting
reinvented, but it seems reasonable to approach it in a layered fashion
like you describe.
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
