On Thu, 2018-07-26 at 12:22 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 07:17:03PM +0800, Yi Min Zhao wrote:
在 2018/7/26 下午7:00, Andrea Bolognani 写道:
From the test cases I see a zpci devices, with its own uid and fid, is created for the pci-bridge as well... Is that intentional?
Firstly pci bridge can be auto-generated if a pci device is to be plugged to non-existing pci bus. IIUC, pci-bridge is treated as a controller device in libvirt. So I think, it's pretty readable not only in libvirt xml but also in qtree, if we assign zpci device for it. Otherwise address type of pci-bridge is pci type but has no uid and fid. Isn't it odd?
Everything about zPCI is odd ;) I guess there's no harm in creating an additional zpci device, and as you say it will keep things a bit more consistent, which is good.
From the libvirt side we must avoid any scenario where QEMU auto-adds devices behind our back. If adding a device requires adding a controller libvirt must do this explicitly and record it in the XML.
Definitely. My question was whether the corresponding zpci device should be created as well... -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization