On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 01:44:06PM +0900, Masaki Kanno wrote:
> Thu, 14 May 2009 13:40:04 +1000, Simon Horman wrote:
>
> >On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:41:11AM +0900, Masaki Kanno wrote:
> >Content-Description: Mail message body
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I found a problem of xm pci-list. In inactive managed domains,
> >> I cannot confirm virtual slot numbers of PCI devices by using
> >> xm pci-list as follows. In fact, I can confirm virtual slot
> >> numbers of PCI devices by using xm pci-list if active domains.
> >
> >Hi Kanno-san,
> >
> >I'm a bit dubious about using requested_vslot if vslot isn't
> >present, because as the name suggests, its just a request,
> >that may fail. However, I do conceede that it is probably the
> >best option available if you are not happy with the
> >vslot not being reported in this case. Is there really a need
> >for the slot to be reported in this case?
>
> Hi Simon,
>
> Yes, I think that the virtual slot is necessary in the case.
> When I add a definition of a PCI device to an inactive managed domain by
> using xm pci-attach, I'd like to know current PCI device configuration
> of the domain. (e.g. I'd like to know free virtual slot numbers or used
> virtual slot numbers.)
Hi Kanno-san,
Ok, understood.
Have you checked your patch against the case where the vslot is not
specified? I wonder if you might need a little bit of extra logic for that
case.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home