|
From: | Paul Brook |
Subject: | [Qemu-devel] Re: RFC qdev path semantics |
Date: | Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:01:21 +0100 |
User-agent: | KMail/1.13.3 (Linux/2.6.33-2-amd64; KDE/4.4.4; x86_64; ; ) |
> > ### Paul proposes to require all buses to define bus addresses. Make > > one up if necessary. > > That seems arbitrary and prone to breakage. How do we handle a subtle > change in device instantiation order and still allow migration? If by > code change or command line ordering my frobnitz moves from: > > /i440FX-pcihost/pci.0/PIIX3/@01.0/isa.0/0 > > to > > /i440FX-pcihost/pci.0/PIIX3/@01.0/isa.0/1 Two things are apparent here. (a) You've clearly misunderstood the proposals. The paths above make no sense. (b) You've picked a particularly poor definition of device address for the ISA bus. We can do much better than device creation order. > ... > I can live with PATH/@BUS-ADDR if it's still felt that > PATH/address@hidden isn't canonical. What that means is that I'll > probably code up vmstate and ramblocks to append IDENT themselves to > keep all the goodness of having per PATH/IDENT namespaces. As discussed elsewhere in this thread, addition of IDENT to the device path is neither necessary nor sufficient for migration. I really feel like we're going round in circles here. Paul
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |