Re: [PATCH] Add a new PIIX option to control PCI hot unplugging of devices on non-root buses

[Ani Sinha]

> On Apr 29, 2020, at 9:02 PM, Igor Mammedov <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 14:44:48 -0400
> Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 03:23:56PM +0000, Ani Sinha wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 22, 2020, at 4:15 PM, Ani Sinha <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Apr 21, 2020, at 8:32 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 02:45:04PM +0000, Ani Sinha wrote:  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Apr 20, 2020, at 8:32 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But I for one would like to focus on keeping PIIX stable
>>>>>>> and focus development on q35.  Not bloating PIIX with lots of new
>>>>>>> features is IMHO a good way to do that.  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Does this mean this patch is a no-go then? :(  
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'd support this patch, as I don't think it can really be described as
>>>>> bloat or destabalizing. It is just adding a simple property to
>>>>> conditionalize existing functionality.  Telling people to switch to Q35
>>>>> is unreasonable as it is not a simple 1-1 conversion from existing use
>>>>> of PIIX. Q35 has much higher complexity in its configuration, has higher
>>>>> memory overhead per VM too, and lacks certain features of PIIX too.  
>>>> 
>>>> Cool. How do we go forward from here?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> We would really appreciate if we can add this extra knob in
>>> Qemu. Maybe someone else also in the community will find this
>>> useful. We don’t want to maintain this patch internally forever
>>> but rather prefer we maintain this as a Qemu community.  
>> 
>> Michael, I agree with Daniel here and I don't think we should
>> start refusing PIIX features if they are useful for a portion of
>> the QEMU community.
>> 
>> Would you reconsider and merge this patch?
> 
> I put this patch on my review queue (hopefully next week I'd be able to get 
> to it)

Any progress?