From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:46372)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1RXYiL-0005pN-7o
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 08:36:14 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1RXYiF-00087D-HG
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 08:36:13 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:14974)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1RXYiF-000873-93
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 08:36:07 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 11:35:44 -0200
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20111205133544.GA32052@amt.cnet>
References: <1322853560-24152-1-git-send-email-emunson@mgebm.net>
	<4ED9331B.9060708@web.de> <20111202212726.GA5662@mgebm.net>
	<4ED9E6B0.2000903@web.de> <20111203111935.GA25573@amt.cnet>
	<4EDA0731.80302@web.de> <20111203114241.GA25871@amt.cnet>
	<4EDA0BEF.7010204@web.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4EDA0BEF.7010204@web.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V3] Guest stop notification
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Cc: "@amt.cnet@amt.cnet, Eric B Munson <emunson@mgebm.net>,
	ryanh@linux.vnet.ibm.com <ryanh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	aliguori@us.ibm.com <aliguori@us.ibm.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>

On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 12:45:51PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> I was referring to the relation between the IOCTL and kvmclock, but
> >> IOCTL vs. kvm_run.
> >>
> >> Jan
> > 
> > Ah, OK. Yes, we better characterize it as KVMCLOCK specific (a generic
> > "guest is paused" command is not the scope of this patch).
> > 
> > So appending KVMCLOCK_ to the ioctl definitions would make that more
> > explicit.
> 
> IMHO, that would move things in the wrong direction. The IOCTL in itself
> has _nothing_ to do with kvmclock. It's just that its x86 backend is
> implemented on top of that infrastructure. For me the IOCTL is pretty
> generic, can be backed by kvmclock, but need not be on all future archs.
> 
> Jan

I do not see the need to lift this infrastructure to arch independent
status at the moment, without clear semantics on that arch independent
level.

So I am fine with the current GUEST_PAUSED naming (which can later be
extended with GUEST_RESUMED etc, if necessary, for use by other archs
for example), and implementation in hw/kvmclock.c.