On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 06:24:57PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> On 02/08/10 17:27, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 12:14:11PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>>> On 02/08/10 11:17, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 03:41:47PM +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
>>>>> initialize header type register in pci generic code.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: Blue Swirl<blauwir...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin"<m...@redhat.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Isaku Yamahata<yamah...@valinux.co.jp>
>>>>
>>>> No objections here, I am assuming this will be followed
>>>> by patches removing header type init from bridges?
>>>> From qdev perspective, it is probably cleaner to make
>>>> multifunction bit a separate qdev property though, right?
>>>
>>> From a qdev perspective it would make *alot* of sense to move a bunch of
>>> pci config stuff (including, but not limited to header type) into
>>> PCIDeviceInfo.
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>> Gerd
>>
>> Actually - won't this make it possible to create broken configurations
>> by tweaking properties from command-line?
>
> Not as property, as struct element in PCIDeviceInfo. i.e.
>
> static PCIDeviceInfo e1000_info = {
> [ stuff which is here right now ]
> .vendor_id = PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,
> .device_id = E1000_DEVID,
> .class = PCI_CLASS_NETWORK_ETHERNET,
> [ probably more stuff which makes sense ]
> }
>
> Then setup this in generic pci code instead of having each driver doing
> a bunch of pci_config_set_*() calls.
>
> cheers,
> Gerd
We still end up with class, vendor etc duplicated in 2 places. Why do
we want stuff like vendor id in PCIDeviceInfo at all? Why can't
everyone just use pci_config_set/get calls?
--
MST
