From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: Configuration vs. compat hints [was Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv3 03/13] qemu: add routines to manage PCI capabilities] Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:03:22 -0500 Message-ID: <4A3662BA.6030304@codemonkey.ws> References: <4A3636FA.1040609@redhat.com> <20090615124101.GH6351@redhat.com> <4A364381.401@redhat.com> <4A364401.6010500@codemonkey.ws> <4A3647FB.9010808@redhat.com> <4A364B53.9080007@codemonkey.ws> <4A364FE0.40204@redhat.com> <4A3651EB.3070204@codemonkey.ws> <4A36555A.4090303@redhat.com> <4A3659A0.3050108@codemonkey.ws> <20090615143737.GB14405@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dlaor@redhat.com, Avi Kivity , Carsten Otte , Rusty Russell , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Mark McLoughlin , Glauber Costa , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Blue Swirl , Christian Borntraeger , Paul Brook To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Return-path: Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com ([74.125.92.27]:14117 "EHLO qw-out-2122.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751331AbZFOPDX (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:03:23 -0400 Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 5so2314309qwd.37 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:03:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20090615143737.GB14405@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> I'm not at all arguing against pci_addr. I'm arguing about how libvirt >> should use it with respect to the "genesis" use-case where libvirt has >> no specific reason to choose one PCI slot over another. In that case, >> I'm merely advocating that we want to let QEMU make the decision. >> > > The allocation code could be moved out into a library, and libvirt could > link with it (ducks). > Why does libvirt want to do allocation? Regards, Anthony Liguori