Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Register PV driver product numbers 4 and 5.

[Sander Eikelenboom <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Wednesday, October 9, 2013, 10:00:53 AM, you wrote:

> On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 15:53 +0100, Paul Durrant wrote:

>> > It's a bit confusing, I agree. Referring back to previous threads though, 
>> > all
>> > HVM systems are assumed to have the xen platform PCI device (as there is
>> > no way to turn it off if youâre using machine type xenfv), thus the fixed 
>> > IO
>> > ports that implement the blacklisting protocol are assumed to always be
>> > present. Because the ports are fixed and always present the PV drivers 
>> > don't
>> > have to care which device they are binding to - they talk to the same IO 
>> > ports
>> > regardless.

Paul,

Do you by any chance know the commit that made this unconditional ?
(it used to be possible to switch it off with xen_platform_pci=0, and i'm 
trying to see
if the platform device and the hidden NIC (pci 00:03.0 not visible in guest 
lspci but it's there
(xl dmesg reports it begin generate and there is a gap in the device number
(platform 00:02.0 passthroughed device 00:04.0) has something to do with it.

The rom bar of my passthroughed device some how gets wired at first to the vga 
bios of the cirrus vga or stdvga.
When i disable the emulated vga (-nographic and -vga none) it is suddenly wired 
to the ixpe rom (of device 00:03.0).

So there is something funky going on in either hvmloader, seabios and/or qemu.
But it would be nice to rule out as much as possible.

--
Sander

> That makes sense I suppose.

> Can we add some words about this relationship to the docs then?

>> Ping? Do I need to add any further clarification?

> I thought I'd already replied but I don't see it anywhere on the list or
> in my sent box, sorry.

> Ian/





_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel