qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Configuration vs. compat hints [was Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv3 03/13]


From: Avi Kivity
Subject: Re: Configuration vs. compat hints [was Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv3 03/13] qemu: add routines to manage PCI capabilities]
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:35:46 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090513 Fedora/3.0-2.3.beta2.fc11 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0b2

On 06/15/2009 04:20 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:

then turns on the power. Command line options are the parts lying around when we start.

btw, -drive needs to be separated:

  -controller type=lsi1234,pci_addr=foobar,name=blah
  -drive file=foo.img,controller=blah,index=0
  -drive file=bar.img,controller=blah,index=1

Drives to not have pci addresses.

Drivers don't have indexes and buses but we specify it on the -drive line.

Drives do have indexes. On old parallel scsi drives you set the index by clicking a button on the back of the drive to cycle through scsi addresses 0-7. An IDE drive's index is determined by the cable (master/slave). A SATA drive's index is determined by which header on the motherboard the drive connects to.


It's not at all that simple. SCSI has a hierarchical address mechanism with 0-7 targets but then potentially multiple LUNs per target. Today, we always emulate a single LUN per target but if we ever wanted to support more than 7 disks on a SCSI controller, we would have to add multiple LUN support too. So the current linear unit= parameter is actually pretty broken for SCSI.

Well, another level in the hierarchy, but I don't think it materially changes things.


For IDE, it's a combination of bus, slot, and master/slave. For virtio, it's just a PCI address. What we really need is something that is more opaque and controller specific.

virtio also has a bus (did you mean the pci bus for IDE?), master/slave is the index. virtio doesn't have index, but IMO that was a mistake and we should have designed it as a disk controller in the first place.

For instance, if we were going to do controllers...

-controller type=lsi1234,pci_addr=foobar,name=blah
-controller-disk controller=blah,target=0,lun=1,name=sda

-controller type=ide,pci_addr=barfoo,name=ide
-controller-disk controller=ide,slot=secondary,cable=slave,name=hdd

-drive file=foo.img,controller-disk=sda
-drive file=bar.img,controller-disk=hdd

And having "-hdd file=foo.img" be short-hand for "-drive file=%s,controller-disk=%s".

Yeah.



If by bus you mean the if= parameter, then drives certainly do have buses. Just try connecting the scsi drive from the previous paragraph to a USB port.

No, I meant drive file=foo.img,bus=3. If that doesn't seem obvious what it should do to you that's because it isn't at all obvious :-) It ends up skipping a predefined number of locations in the drive table. This is pretty broken fundamentally because it assumes controllers always support a fixed number of devices. Nothing really respects bus_id though so in practice, I assume it's almost universally broken.

Isn't the drive table something totally internal? And how does bus= relate to it?

Confused.


--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]