From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Jackson Subject: Re: RFC: Automatically making a PCI device assignable in the config file Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 14:10:41 +0100 Message-ID: <20960.81.509830.418330@mariner.uk.xensource.com> References: <20957.26468.175816.677766@mariner.uk.xensource.com> <51DD7420.5050803@eu.citrix.com> <51DE988E.7020700@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: George Dunlap Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , David Vrabel , Ian Campbell List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org George Dunlap writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] RFC: Automatically making a PCI device assignable in the config file"): > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:35 PM, David Vrabel wrot> > I don't think this proposal really helps with avoiding this. I think > > most people will end up always adding 'seize=1' because to avoid having > > to do so means altering config files elsewhere and rebooting. > > I guess what I'm worried about is the fact that we would be changing > things that are now "safe" to things that are not safe. At the > moment, "xl pci-assignable-add" might yank out a system device if you > make a typo; but it was introduced that way, so people always had to > be careful. But currently, "pci=[]" and "xl pci-attach" do *not* > behave that way; you have to make the device assignable first. So you > don't need to be particularly careful. Adding "seize" at least should > flag up to people that they need to double-check. > > If people really object to the extra flag, I can write up a patch > without it, but I'd prefer to have something... I think at the very least there should be the ability to have it as a global config option. Ian.