1. 18 10月, 2016 7 次提交
  2. 17 10月, 2016 1 次提交
    • A
      conf: Explain some code in more detail · 61e10143
      Andrea Bolognani 提交于
      The code is entirely correct, but it still managed to trip me
      up when I first ran into it because I did not realize right away
      that VIR_PCI_CONNECT_TYPES_ENDPOINT was not a single flag, but
      rather a mask including both VIR_PCI_CONNECT_TYPE_PCI_DEVICE and
      VIR_PCI_CONNECT_TYPE_PCIE_DEVICE.
      
      In order to save the next distracted traveler in PCI Address Land
      some time, document this fact with a comment. Add a test case for
      the behavior as well.
      61e10143
  3. 15 10月, 2016 1 次提交
    • L
      conf: restrict what type of buses will accept a pci-bridge · 538220c3
      Laine Stump 提交于
      A pci-bridge has *almost* the same rules as a legacy PCI endpoint
      device for where it can be automatically connected, and until now both
      had been considered identical. There is one pairing that is okay when
      specifically requested by the user (i.e. manual assignment), but we
      want to avoid it when auto-assigning addresses - plugging a pci-bridge
      directly into pcie-root (it is cleaner to plug in a dmi-to-pci-bridge,
      then plug the pci-bridge into that).
      
      In order to allow that difference, this patch makes a separate
      CONNECT_TYPE for pci-bridge, and uses it to restrict auto-assigned
      addresses for pci-bridges to be only on pci-root, pci-expander-bus,
      dmi-to-pci-bridge, or on another pci-bridge.
      
      NB: As with other discouraged-but-seem-to-work configurations
      (e.g. plugging a legacy PCI device into a pcie-root-port) if someone
      *really* wants to, they can still force a pci-bridge to be plugged
      into pcie-root (by manually specifying its PCI address.)
      538220c3
  4. 14 10月, 2016 21 次提交
  5. 13 10月, 2016 6 次提交
  6. 12 10月, 2016 4 次提交