| Message ID | 1489750157-17401-2-git-send-email-tianyu.lan@intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 07:29:14PM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote: > From: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com> > > xen-viommu will be a sysbus device and the device model will > be enabled via "-device" parameter. > > Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@intel.com> I'm worried about the bugs we may expose by accepting all the other sysbus devices in the command-line in addition to xen-viommu. I am working on a RFC to replace "has_dynamic_sysbus" with a whitelist of sysbus device classes. This way we could enable only xen-viommu on i440fx, instead of suddenly enabling all sysbus devices just because of xen-viommu. > --- > hw/i386/pc_piix.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c > index a07dc81..3289593 100644 > --- a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c > +++ b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c > @@ -436,6 +436,7 @@ static void pc_i440fx_machine_options(MachineClass *m) > m->hot_add_cpu = pc_hot_add_cpu; > m->default_machine_opts = "firmware=bios-256k.bin"; > m->default_display = "std"; > + m->has_dynamic_sysbus = true; > } > > static void pc_i440fx_2_7_machine_options(MachineClass *m) > -- > 1.8.3.1 >
Hi Eduardo: Thanks for your review. On 2017年03月21日 03:49, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 07:29:14PM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote: >> From: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com> >> >> xen-viommu will be a sysbus device and the device model will >> be enabled via "-device" parameter. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com> >> Signed-off-by: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@intel.com> > > I'm worried about the bugs we may expose by accepting all the > other sysbus devices in the command-line in addition to > xen-viommu. > > I am working on a RFC to replace "has_dynamic_sysbus" with a > whitelist of sysbus device classes. This way we could enable only > xen-viommu on i440fx, instead of suddenly enabling all sysbus > devices just because of xen-viommu. That sounds reasonable. Thanks for the job and we rebase on your patches. > >> --- >> hw/i386/pc_piix.c | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c >> index a07dc81..3289593 100644 >> --- a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c >> +++ b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c >> @@ -436,6 +436,7 @@ static void pc_i440fx_machine_options(MachineClass *m) >> m->hot_add_cpu = pc_hot_add_cpu; >> m->default_machine_opts = "firmware=bios-256k.bin"; >> m->default_display = "std"; >> + m->has_dynamic_sysbus = true; >> } >> >> static void pc_i440fx_2_7_machine_options(MachineClass *m) >> -- >> 1.8.3.1 >> >
diff --git a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c index a07dc81..3289593 100644 --- a/hw/i386/pc_piix.c +++ b/hw/i386/pc_piix.c @@ -436,6 +436,7 @@ static void pc_i440fx_machine_options(MachineClass *m) m->hot_add_cpu = pc_hot_add_cpu; m->default_machine_opts = "firmware=bios-256k.bin"; m->default_display = "std"; + m->has_dynamic_sysbus = true; } static void pc_i440fx_2_7_machine_options(MachineClass *m)