On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 05:18:46PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > On 06/06/2013 08:01 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 06:48:44PM +1000, David Gibson wrote: > >> The current PCI subsystem has kind of half-hearted support for > >> multiple independent root buses - aka PCI domains - in the form of the > >> PCIHostBus structure and its domain field. However, it doesn't quite > >> work because pci_host_bus_register() is always called with a domain of > >> 0. > >> > >> Worse, though, the whole concept of numbered domains isn't general > >> enough. Many platforms can have independent root buses (usually on > >> wholly independent host bridges), but only x86 gives them a > >> hardware-significant domain number, essentially as a hack to allow all > >> the separate config spaces to be accessed via the same IO ports. > >> Linux guests on other platforms will show domain numbers in lspci, but > >> these are purely guest assigned, so qemu won't know about them. > >> > >> This patch series, therefore, removes the broken-as-is domain concept > >> from qemu, and replaces it with a different way of handling multiple > >> root buses, based on a host bridge class method to provide a > >> identifier for the root bus. This hook is designed in such a way as > >> to allow a single bridge object to support mutiple root buses with > >> future changes, which will allow future implementations of x86 north > >> bridges with multiple domains to be supported correctly, and in way > >> that matches the existing practice for all external interfaces. > >> > >> v2: > >> * Rework concept of "primary" bus in response to Michael Tsirkin's > >> comments. > > > > > > Looks good to me. > > > > Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> > > > > I'll wait a bit so others have a chance to comment, then apply > > if everyone is happy. > > > So, did it happen? I would be happy :) When is it expected to reach > upstream? Thanks! >
It will be in the next pull I send. I'm waiting for Anthony to merge the previous pull from June 6, once it's merged I'll send next pull within a couple of days (I try not to flood him too much). So ... RSN. > > No need to repost for the lack of -M flag - I wish there was a way > > to specify that in git config. > > > > > -- > Alexey
