On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 12:59:42PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 05/07/2016 12:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > -m 2G,slots=16,maxmem=2T > > > > > > On a host with a 39bit physaddress limit do you error > > > on that or not? I think oVirt is currently doing something > > > similar to that, but I'm trying to get confirmation. > > > > That would only be a problem since pci is allocated above > > maxmem so 64 bit pci addresses aren't accessible. > > With my proposal we can actually force firmware to avoid > > using 64 bit memory for that config. > > Will work better than today. > > So you would remove completely the 64-bit _CRS in this case?
Yes. > How do you handle migration in the above scenario from say 46bit host to > 39bit host, where the firmware has mapped (while running on the source) > a 64-bit BAR above the destination's maximum physical address? > > Thanks, > > Paolo Again management would specify how much 64 bit pci space firmware should use. If more is specified than host can support we can error out. -- MST
