On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 13:15 +0800, Yi Min Zhao wrote:
> > > From the high level point of view, code outside of
conf/ should,
> > > for the most part, not need to concern itself with zPCI at all: it
> > > would eg. ask for a PCI address to be allocated, and if the device
> > > in question can be a zPCI device then a zPCI extension address will
> > > be allocated for it as part of the same function call; the only
> > > part of qemu/ that should care about the zPCI address is the one
> > > generating the relevant command line arguments.
> > >
> > > Can you try and see whether this kind of API would work?
> >
> > I did a simple test. It worked. Do you prefer this way?
>
> Yes please, I'd very much like to see what that looks like and
> whether it addresses the problems caused by the ambiguity of the
> API we've used until now.
So do you mean we use this kind of API in next version for review?
Yes, please :)
--
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization