On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 08:16:30PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > We do need to agree about the correct paths however, this is host/guest > > interface which we have to maintain forever, and it's important to get > > it right. I kept hoping we can come up with something saner than > > the sequence # but oh well. Do you disagree with the statement > > that seabios path is currently incorrect? Kevin seems to agree. > > As discussed earlier, there are two questions to consider about the OFW > devpath pattern > > /pci-root@N/pci@i0cf8/... > > that SeaBIOS currently recognizes for devices that reside behind extra > PCI root buses. > > Q1: everything in that pattern that is not "N" > Q2: what goes into N > > These are independent questions.
Right. But what I was discussing is a different issue. The point is that it does not make sense to have /pci@i0cf8 under two hierarchies: it's the same register. What happens is that you access /pci@i0cf8 and then *through that* you access another pci root. Not the other way around. The proposal thus is to switch to /pci@i0cf8/pci-root@N in seabios, unconditionally - not if (QEMU). And I thought Kevin agreed it's a good idea. Kevin - is this a good summary of your opinion? -- MST
