On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 02:36:57PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 05:07:31PM +1100, David Gibson wrote:
> > Hi Michael, Alex,
> >
> > This patch represents a compromise I hope will be acceptable after the
> > long thread discussing handling of multiple PCI host bridges on the
> > pseries machine. Patch 1/1 is just a preliminary enforcing uniqueness
> > of LIOBNs in the IOMMU code.
> >
> > Patch 2/2 is the meat. It allows either explicit configuration of all
> > the properties, or the user can just set an abstract index which will
> > generate sensible and probably-unique values for all the rest.
> >
> > With these patches I was able to do something like:
> > qemu-system-ppc64 -M pseries -m 1024 -nographic \
> > fc17-root.qcow2 -net none -device nec-usb-xhci -device \
> > spapr-pci-host-bridge,index=1 -device e1000,netdev=fred \
> > -netdev user,id=fred
> >
> > I was able to see both the PCI domains in the guest, and use the NIC
> > on the secondary domain.
> >
> > There are still some gotches with multiple domains though. The domain
> > value in PCIHostBus is still always initialized to 0, and there are
> > other places in the PCI core where handling of multiple domains is
> > essentially stubbed out.
> >
> > Michael, any thoughts on what to do about that? I could fix up the
> > PCI code so that domain is actually set and used. But I think the
> > whole notion of domain numbers is kind of bogus on the qemu side:
> > since PCI domains are completely independent from each other, it's
> > only platform convention which determines what the domain numbers are.
> > On platforms that don't have a strong convention, the guest will
> > number them itself and we have no way of knowing that. So it seems to
> > me that the PCI code should instead of domain numbers just use the
> > device ID, or the bus name or some qemu side symbolic name. For
> > platforms that do have a numbering convention those names can be
> > derived from the domain numbers, but it also works for platforms that
> > don't.
>
> I agree with this last statement: using bus numbers and domain
> numbers is not a good idea. We mostly need to support domain 0
> to mean "default" for backwards compatibility.
Ok. Where are domain numbers actually specified by the qemu user?
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
