On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 07:53:47AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > Hi, > > > Understood, but I'd really prefer a file in docs/. We should be > > rigorous about having formal specs for all of our paravirtual devices. > > The code shouldn't be the spec. > > Well, pci-serial and pci-bridge are *not* paravirtual devices. > > They follow a specification describing the programming interface, and > likewise does real hardware. Same is true for all usb host controllers > and ahci btw. I can certainly place a text file for pci-serial in > docs/spec/, but there isn't much qemu-specific to specify ... > > Guests have generic drivers which just match the PCI class and > programming interface fields in the pci config space and don't care > (much) what the pci id is. The pci id is used to print the name of the > hardware, apply quirks, handle vendor-specific extensions, and in case > of pci-serial windows also uses it to figure whenever the device is just > a serial port or a modem (behind a 16550). > > Whenever we'll pick the pci ids of existing hardware or assign a unique > one is a matter of taste. Picking unique IDs from Red Hat vendor space > doesn't make the devices paravirtual. usb controllers and ahci got IDs > matching the ones of the intel chipsets (piix, q35) emulated by qemu, > which makes sense in that case. > > For pci-serial windows needs a "driver" (which is just a inf file, the > driver itself is shipped by windows). So in that case it is easier to > go with our own ids I think, as we can simply ship a inf file then. > When picking the IDs of other cards, existing as real hardware, users > would have to hunt down the (non-redistributable) driver package for the > real hardware to get it going in windows. > > cheers, > Gerd
Any way to bypass the need to distribute the inf? -- MST
