[libvirt] [PATCH v5 3/4] formatdomain.html.in: document <address type='unassigned'/>

[Alex Williamson]

On Tue, 17 Dec 2019 16:06:46 -0300
Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413 at gmail.com>
> ---
>  docs/formatdomain.html.in | 13 +++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/docs/formatdomain.html.in b/docs/formatdomain.html.in
> index e06cf2061b..7a5ebdd67e 100644
> --- a/docs/formatdomain.html.in
> +++ b/docs/formatdomain.html.in
> @@ -4203,6 +4203,19 @@
>          attributes: <code>iobase</code> and <code>irq</code>.
>          <span class="since">Since 1.2.1</span>
>        </dd>
> +      <dt><code>unassigned</code></dt>
> +      <dd>For PCI hostdevs, <code><address type='unassigned'/></code>
> +        allows the admin to include a PCI hostdev in the domain XML definition,
> +        without making it available for the guest. This allows for configurations
> +        in which Libvirt manages the device as a regular PCI hostdev,
> +        regardless of whether the guest will have access to it. This is
> +        an alternative to scenarios in which the admin might be compelled to use
> +        an ACS patch to remove the device from the guest while Libvirt
> +        retains control of the PCI device.

The ACS patch is really orthogonal to the goal here, so I don't think
it should be included in the discussion.  A user can just as easily
pre-bind other devices to vfio-pci to make the configuration viable
rather than patch their kernel to change the viability constraints,
which this series doesn't accomplish either.  Thanks,

Alex

> +        <code><address type='unassigned'/></code> is an invalid address
> +        type for all other device types.
> +        <span class="since">Since 6.0.0</span>
> +      </dd>
>      </dl>
>  
>      <h4><a id="elementsVirtio">Virtio-related options</a></h4>