Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 07 Nov 2007 00:29:13 -0600 | From | Anthony Liguori <> | Subject | Re: Use of virtio device IDs |
| |
Rusty Russell wrote: > On Wednesday 07 November 2007 16:40:13 Avi Kivity wrote: > >> Gregory Haskins wrote: >> >>> but FWIW: This is a major motivation for the reason that the >>> IOQ stuff I posted a while back used strings for device identification >>> instead of a fixed length, centrally managed namespace like PCI >>> vendor/dev-id. Then you can just name your device something reasonably >>> unique (e.g. "qumranet::veth", or "ibm-pvirt-clock"). >>> >> I dislike strings. They make it look as if you have a nice extensible >> interface, where in reality you have a poorly documented interface which >> leads to poor interoperability. >> > > Yes, you end up with exactly names like "qumranet::veth" > and "ibm-pvirt-clock". I would recommend looking very hard at /proc, Open > Firmware on a modern system, or the Xen store, to see what a lack of > limitation can do to you :) > > >> We will support non-pci for s390, but in order to support Windows and >> older Linux PCI is necessary. >> > > The aim is that PCI support is clean, but that we're not really tied to PCI. > I think we're getting closer with the recent config changes. >
Yes, my main desire was to ensure that we had a clean PCI ABI that would be natural to implement on a platform like Windows. I think with the recent config_ops refactoring, we can now do that.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
> Cheers, > Rusty. >
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |