On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 03:35:38PM +0000, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Gleb Natapov <g...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > This is current sate of the patch series for people to comment on.
> > I dropped ioport double reservation checking from isa-bus and added
> > bus_id field for IDE bus since as Markus pointed out unit has different
> > meaning there.
> >
> > This patch series produce names like:
> >
> > i...@03f1-03f5,03f7/f...@a
> > i...@03f1-03f5,03f7/f...@b
> > p...@0000:00:01.1/i...@1:0
> > p...@0000:00:01.1/i...@1:1
> > p...@0000:00:03.0/virtio-...@0
> > p...@0000:00:04.0/virtio-...@0
> >
> > They will be passed to BIOS to determine boot order.
>
> We also use OpenBIOS for PPC and Sparcs. A compatible boot device for
> those would be OpenFirmware tree name. I think your names should then
> become:
> /pci/isa/f...@3f1/f...@0
> /pci/isa/f...@3f1/f...@1
Why is it PCI?
> /pci/i...@0/1,0
> /pci/i...@0/1,1
Where pci address here?
> /pci/virtio-...@1
> /pci/virtio-...@2
And here?
And we will need to describe ROMs too. I planned to have something like:
r...@romfilename for roms loaded with -option-rom command line option.
>
> The PCI addressing scheme in OF was a bit twisty, I just invented
> integers in place of those.
>
> Anyway, I don't think we should invent yet another device path naming system.
IS this format documented somewhere? I am not attached to specific
format at all.
--
Gleb.
