On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 09:51:44AM +0800, Amos Kong wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 05:04:03PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 09:35:11PM +0800, Amos Kong wrote: > > > Currently we only support to allocate 0xff mac-addresses, > > > if we start guest by pci-bridge/multiple-func, the macaddr > > > are not enough. > > > > > > This patch extends the mac-address space to 0xffffffff > > > > > > 52:54:00:00:00:00 ~ 52:54:ff:ff:ff:ff > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Amos Kong <[email protected]> > > > > > > And then there's even more chance a user error > > (forgot to specify mac) will lead to broken > > LANs because of collisions. > > > > Why is it that whoever wants >256 NICs can't just > > specify the addresses explicitly? > > We should lead user to use assigned mac, those two patches > are just considered for the lazy users ;)
Let's just fail address allocation once the low byte overflows. If you want >256 NICs, specify MAC addresses. > > -- > Amos.
