On 07/06/2012 03:06 PM, Amit Shah wrote:
On (Tue) 26 Jun 2012 [08:01:20], Anthony Liguori wrote:
>On 06/26/2012 05:48 AM, Amit Shah wrote:
> >On (Mon) 25 Jun 2012 [17:59:28], Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>On 06/25/2012 05:46 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>>From: Amit Shah<amit.s...@redhat.com>
> >
> >>>diff --git a/hw/virtio-pci.c b/hw/virtio-pci.c
> >
> >>>+static void virtio_rng_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void *data)
> >>>+{
> >>>+ DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_CLASS(klass);
> >>>+ PCIDeviceClass *k = PCI_DEVICE_CLASS(klass);
> >>>+
> >>>+ k->init = virtio_rng_init_pci;
> >>>+ k->exit = virtio_rng_exit_pci;
> >>>+ k->vendor_id = PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT_QUMRANET;
> >>>+ k->device_id = PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIRTIO_RNG;
> >>>+ k->revision = VIRTIO_PCI_ABI_VERSION;
> >>>+ k->class_id = PCI_CLASS_OTHERS;
> >>
> >>WHQL tends to get very particular about PCI classes. Do we
> >>understand the implications of making this CLASS_OTHERS and WHQL?
> >
> >I've not asked around; will update with info when I get it.
>
>Thanks.
... and I heard back: PCI_CLASS_OTHERS is fine; no problem.
Unclassified device (PCI_CLASS_OTHERS) is the easiest way to pass M$
WHQL. It doesn't do any functional tests to the device itself, unlike
NICs/StorPort devices. If M$ had a specific entropy device type it would
be good to use it but I doubt such exist.
