On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 03:20:02PM +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 04:09:16PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > Long term, we should fix all devices and *then* they can claim 64 bit
> > > > support always. As a nice side effect, we'll be able to avoid
> > > > rebuildi
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 04:09:16PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > Long term, we should fix all devices and *then* they can claim 64 bit
> > > support always. As a nice side effect, we'll be able to avoid
> > > rebuilding devices.
> >
> > Are you claiming that (PCI) devices emulation shoul
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 11:01:00PM +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:39:06PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:22:07PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > On 11/03/2009 01:47 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > >>
> > >> If qemu is compiled with target
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:39:06PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:22:07PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 11/03/2009 01:47 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>
> >> If qemu is compiled with target phys address size 32 bit, emulated
> >> devices can not support a 64 bit
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:39:06PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:22:07PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 11/03/2009 01:47 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>
> >> If qemu is compiled with target phys address size 32 bit, emulated
> >> devices can not support a 64 bit
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:22:07PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 11/03/2009 01:47 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>
>> If qemu is compiled with target phys address size 32 bit, emulated
>> devices can not support a 64 bit BAR. Therefore, according to PCI spec,
>> such devices should declare all BAR
On 11/03/2009 01:47 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
If qemu is compiled with target phys address size 32 bit, emulated
devices can not support a 64 bit BAR. Therefore, according to PCI spec,
such devices should declare all BARs as 32 bit.
What happens if you take a PCI card that supports 6
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 12:52:10PM +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 06:07:30PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 09:21:11PM +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> > > implemented pci 64bit bar support.
> > > The tricky bit is pci_update_mapping().
> > > An O
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 06:07:30PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 09:21:11PM +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> > implemented pci 64bit bar support.
> > The tricky bit is pci_update_mapping().
> > An OS is allowed to set the BAR such that OS can't address the area
> > pointe
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 09:21:11PM +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> implemented pci 64bit bar support.
> The tricky bit is pci_update_mapping().
> An OS is allowed to set the BAR such that OS can't address the area
> pointed by BAR. It doesn't make sense, though.
It might make sense. 32 bit guest ca
10 matches
Mail list logo