From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43954) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eIH0V-0007nX-KY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 11:39:17 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eIH0S-0003M9-EC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 11:39:15 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:54640) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eIH0S-00031o-42 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 11:39:12 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098394.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id vAOGd3xj013716 for ; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 11:39:09 -0500 Received: from e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.109]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2eejxqkmm1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 11:39:09 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 16:39:07 -0000 References: <20171121111825.17916-1-pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171121144457.60adb0c3.cohuck@redhat.com> <1145a6bc-45fd-820a-9dcc-249d9b2802ff@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171121172022.5da16158.cohuck@redhat.com> <88bc72cf-732c-fc07-9898-18d7b58b947d@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171122131343.26da0482.cohuck@redhat.com> <594e1952-7097-0927-d913-d3b915df2305@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171122172522.281cfb4b.cohuck@redhat.com> <76f95c6f-641e-2fe0-73b4-3ab24fc1a93f@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171124134650.46665791.cohuck@redhat.com> <7eaa796e-7815-f943-58b5-ecb5a0bb252e@de.ibm.com> <20171124142758.39d7726f.cohuck@redhat.com> <131b311b-c262-3636-c7ee-1c59ee283823@de.ibm.com> <1ddb44db-2c5c-d64f-56e0-e4582f82b572@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171124171510.2343ccdf.cohuck@redhat.com> From: Halil Pasic Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 17:39:04 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171124171510.2343ccdf.cohuck@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <8c18df3e-92a0-f88f-6d24-e1df051c8138@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/1] s390x/css: unresrict cssids List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Cornelia Huck Cc: Christian Borntraeger , Shalini Chellathurai Saroja , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, Boris Fiuczynski , Dong Jia Shi On 11/24/2017 05:15 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>> In theory this should work. >>> >>> In reality it seems more complicated. A per-device property is easy and can be >>> inspected on the command line (e.g. -device virtio-blk-ccw,help), while a new >>> machine property would require to change the qemu help output and qemu-options >>> file (which makes it visible for all architectures). >> And then we have the fun of describing, that this property is weird, and can >> not be set, and it's value does not matter. > Well, that's the case for both, no? I don't think we have to document _device_ properites in qemu-options.hx I don't see any documented neither for virtio-ccw nor for vfio-ccw. The machine properties, on the contrary, are documented in this file. > > (Unless we simply make this a "default cssid" prop after all - then it > would be more than just a simple indication for libvirt...) > We are now talking about the "cssid-unrestricted" property. The default cssid is not something I would like to do any time soon.