From: christoffer.dall@linaro.org (Christoffer Dall)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 3/5] arm/arm64: KVM: Clarify KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT ABI
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 15:47:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141202144728.GH545@cbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA8ysq5UD4WcfuJqSUV=E8zJR259=8v5S9q1o5aVJpPJQQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 10:53:50PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 27 November 2014 at 18:40, Christoffer Dall
> <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> wrote:
> > It is not clear that this ioctl can be called multiple times for a given
> > vcpu. Userspace already does this, so clarify the ABI.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt | 3 +++
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> > index bb82a90..fc12b4f 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> > @@ -2453,6 +2453,9 @@ return ENOEXEC for that vcpu.
> > Note that because some registers reflect machine topology, all vcpus
> > should be created before this ioctl is invoked.
> >
> > +Userspace can call this function multiple times for a given VCPU, which will
> > +reset the VCPU to its initial states.
>
> How about being a little bit more explicit here with something like:
>
> "Userspace can call this function multiple times for a given VCPU, including
> after the VCPU has been run. This will reset the VCPU to its initial
> state."
yeah, better.
>
> (I notice that api.txt is inconsistent about using "vcpu" or "VCPU"
> or "vCPU"... do we have a preference for new text?)
>
I generally try to match whatever the context is, but I clearly failed
here. I don't think there's a preference, no.
> > +
> > Possible features:
> > - KVM_ARM_VCPU_POWER_OFF: Starts the CPU in a power-off state.
> > Depends on KVM_CAP_ARM_PSCI. If not set, the CPU will be powered on
>
> Do you have to use the same set of feature flags for second and
> subsequent VCPU_INIT calls, or can they be different each time?
>
That's a good question. Do you have any opinion on the matter?
It seems weird to change the target of a Vcpu from some core to another
core, but there is not reason why you shouldn't be able to set a vCpU to
be powered off when run, just because it wasn't earlier on, is
there?
Thanks,
-Christoffer
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: "kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
arm-mail-list <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
kvm-devel <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] arm/arm64: KVM: Clarify KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT ABI
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 15:47:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141202144728.GH545@cbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA8ysq5UD4WcfuJqSUV=E8zJR259=8v5S9q1o5aVJpPJQQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 10:53:50PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 27 November 2014 at 18:40, Christoffer Dall
> <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> wrote:
> > It is not clear that this ioctl can be called multiple times for a given
> > vcpu. Userspace already does this, so clarify the ABI.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt | 3 +++
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> > index bb82a90..fc12b4f 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> > @@ -2453,6 +2453,9 @@ return ENOEXEC for that vcpu.
> > Note that because some registers reflect machine topology, all vcpus
> > should be created before this ioctl is invoked.
> >
> > +Userspace can call this function multiple times for a given VCPU, which will
> > +reset the VCPU to its initial states.
>
> How about being a little bit more explicit here with something like:
>
> "Userspace can call this function multiple times for a given VCPU, including
> after the VCPU has been run. This will reset the VCPU to its initial
> state."
yeah, better.
>
> (I notice that api.txt is inconsistent about using "vcpu" or "VCPU"
> or "vCPU"... do we have a preference for new text?)
>
I generally try to match whatever the context is, but I clearly failed
here. I don't think there's a preference, no.
> > +
> > Possible features:
> > - KVM_ARM_VCPU_POWER_OFF: Starts the CPU in a power-off state.
> > Depends on KVM_CAP_ARM_PSCI. If not set, the CPU will be powered on
>
> Do you have to use the same set of feature flags for second and
> subsequent VCPU_INIT calls, or can they be different each time?
>
That's a good question. Do you have any opinion on the matter?
It seems weird to change the target of a Vcpu from some core to another
core, but there is not reason why you shouldn't be able to set a vCpU to
be powered off when run, just because it wasn't earlier on, is
there?
Thanks,
-Christoffer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-02 14:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-27 18:40 [PATCH 0/5] Improve PSCI system events and fix reboot bugs Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 18:40 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 18:40 ` [PATCH 1/5] arm/arm64: KVM: Correct KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT power off option Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 18:40 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 22:44 ` Peter Maydell
2014-11-27 22:44 ` Peter Maydell
2014-12-02 14:33 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-12-02 14:33 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 18:40 ` [PATCH 2/5] arm/arm64: KVM: Reset the HCR on each vcpu when resetting the vcpu Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 18:40 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 18:40 ` [PATCH 3/5] arm/arm64: KVM: Clarify KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT ABI Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 18:40 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 22:53 ` Peter Maydell
2014-11-27 22:53 ` Peter Maydell
2014-12-02 14:47 ` Christoffer Dall [this message]
2014-12-02 14:47 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-12-02 15:39 ` Peter Maydell
2014-12-02 15:39 ` Peter Maydell
2014-12-02 19:02 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-12-02 19:02 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 18:40 ` [PATCH 4/5] arm/arm64: KVM: Introduce stage2_unmap_vm Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 18:40 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 18:41 ` [PATCH 5/5] arm/arm64: KVM: Turn off vcpus and flush stage-2 pgtables on sytem exit events Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 18:41 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-11-27 23:10 ` Peter Maydell
2014-11-27 23:10 ` Peter Maydell
2014-12-01 17:57 ` Peter Maydell
2014-12-01 17:57 ` Peter Maydell
2014-12-02 13:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-12-02 13:29 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-12-02 15:01 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-12-02 15:01 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-12-02 15:42 ` Peter Maydell
2014-12-02 15:42 ` Peter Maydell
2014-12-01 13:34 ` [PATCH 0/5] Improve PSCI system events and fix reboot bugs Andrew Jones
2014-12-01 13:34 ` Andrew Jones
2014-12-02 14:47 ` Christoffer Dall
2014-12-02 14:47 ` Christoffer Dall
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20141202144728.GH545@cbox \
--to=christoffer.dall@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.