> Please copy the virtio maintainer (Rusty Russell <ru...@rustcorp.com.au>) on
> virtio guest patches.
Well, for now the issue is whether my understanding of qemu/pci-ids.txt and the
comment in virtio_pci.c that both say that the full 0x1000 - 0x10ff range of PCI
device IDs is donated for virtio_pci devices is correct.
If that is true, virtio_pci only claiming 0x1000 - 0x103f doesn't make
much sense to me
and looks more like a typo, because there is no explicit justification
(perhaps in a comment) either.
(3f does not even show up in pci-ids.txt).
The ranges mentioned there are:
1000 -> 10ef (one needs to contact Gerd to reserve an unallocated ID
in that range)
and
10f0 -> 10ff (available for experimental devices, a random ID in that
range can be
used during private development without asking
anyone as long as
you are not shipping anything using it)
the range ef -> f0 (exclusive) is reserved.
>From the above, my understanding is that virtio_pci should definitely
claim at least
00 -> ef and most likely it should claim f0->ff too. The only reason
not to claim some
IDs is to allow someone to have virtio PCI devices that do *not* use
the virtio_pci
infrastructure but why would we want that?
The reason I asked here (I guess qemu-devel would be just as relevant or more,
but it has more traffic) is because Anthony is the author of
virtio_pci.c (at least it looks like it)
so hopefully he knows if that 3f was a typo or not and Gerd is responsible for
the PCI ID namespace management so he knows if pci-ids.txt is correct or not.
Once this issue is clarified I 'm happy to resend the same or an
improved version
of the patch as appropriate.
Thanks,
Pantelis
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
