[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: A set of "standard" virtual devices?
    On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 11:26:52 +0200,
    Andi Kleen <> wrote:

    > >
    > > On s390, it would be more than strangeness. There's no implementation
    > > of PCI at all, someone would have to cook it up - and it wouldn't have
    > > any use beyond those special devices. Since there isn't any bus type
    > > that is available on *all* architectures, a generic "virtual" bus with
    > > very simple probing seems much saner...
    > You just have to change all the distribution installers then.
    > Ok I suppose on s390 that's not that big issue because there are not
    > that many for s390. But for x86 there exist quite a lot. I suppose
    > it's easier to change it in the kernel.

    Huh? I don't follow you here. Why should this be easier for s390 vs.
    x86? (And since there seems to be a trend to use HAL as a device
    discovery tool recently: A new bus type is easy enough to add there.)

    And I really think we should have a clean design in the kernel instead
    of trying to wedge virtual devices into a known system. Exposing
    virtual devices (which may be handled totally differently) as PCI
    devices just seems hackish to me.
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-04-03 12:53    [W:0.023 / U:0.264 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site