This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: SPAM: Re: AW: [Xen-devel] PCI bus emulation?

To: "Retzki, Sascha [Xplain]" <sascha.retzki@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: SPAM: Re: AW: [Xen-devel] PCI bus emulation?
From: Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 17:04:41 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 19:55:21 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <B1DC6EB706D5D511BC9F0050BA05FE10016024D4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <B1DC6EB706D5D511BC9F0050BA05FE10016024D4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.8.2
> >Yep.  Do you think it's possible to simply chop these devices out of the
> >list
> >after initialisation but before passing up to the generic PCI layer?
> >That'd
> >be excellent.
> That'd be OS-specific, no?

Yep.  With the new PCI architecture with dom0 owning the PCI bus, this stuff 
is going to need implementing in each dom0 OS.  The same goes for any dom0 
code but since 3.0 pushes more stuff up to dom0, there'll be more stuff to 
worry about.

It's a tradeoff, though: in return for this, we get better hardware support, 
reduce code duplication and make Xen's codebase smaller.

> I mean, do we know that all kernels in this world have a clean ability to
> Support this? Despite that this is probably not what the kernel developers
> expected, thus their pci-codes may look strange after adding such feature,
> I think.
> (totally unsure because I actually never wrote kernel code yet ;))

No, it's a good point.  It may be that some kernels will be better or worse 
suited to this.  However, for a portable OS it's probably possible to do some 
tricks in the arch/ subdir.  If any other code gets confused by this, it may 
need fixing, however it's only the core PCI code that'll be affected rather 
than all PCI drivers - it should be possible to audit the interface to check 
it won't break.

As an alternative, if the ability to ignore certain PCI devices is useful 
outside Xen (e.g. for excluding faulty devices), it could be added to the 
core PCI code, then all systems would benefit from it.


Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>