From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by 10.25.208.211 with SMTP id h202csp2267028lfg; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 22:44:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.55.76.213 with SMTP id z204mr1014112qka.58.1458711841908; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 22:44:01 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org. [2001:4830:134:3::11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q95si821339qgq.101.2016.03.22.22.44.01 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 22 Mar 2016 22:44:01 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 2001:4830:134:3::11 as permitted sender) client-ip=2001:4830:134:3::11; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 2001:4830:134:3::11 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:41093 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aibaL-0002eu-D5 for alex.bennee@linaro.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 01:44:01 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41950) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aibaI-0002eX-OS for qemu-arm@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 01:43:59 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aibaD-0004x4-Py for qemu-arm@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 01:43:58 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46021) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aibaD-0004wn-Ka; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 01:43:53 -0400 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09C4D461D6; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 05:43:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pxdev.xzpeter.org (dhcp-14-238.nay.redhat.com [10.66.14.238]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u2N5hgRR005452 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 23 Mar 2016 01:43:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 13:43:40 +0800 From: Peter Xu To: Peter Maydell Message-ID: <20160323054340.GI28183@pxdev.xzpeter.org> References: <1458271654-23706-1-git-send-email-peterx@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.22 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Cc: Andrew Jones , Markus Armbruster , Michael Roth , QEMU Developers , qemu-arm , Andrea Bolognani , Eric Blake Subject: Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH v5 0/5] ARM: add query-gic-capabilities SMP command X-BeenThere: qemu-arm@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org X-TUID: tOD3filIYc3E On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 02:49:19PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 18 March 2016 at 03:27, Peter Xu wrote: > > This patch is to add ARM-specific command "query-gic-capability". > > > > The new command can report which kind of GIC device the host/QEMU > > support. The returned result is in the form of array. > > > > Sample command and output: > > > > {"execute": "query-gic-capability"} > > {"return": [{"emulated": false, "version": 3, "kernel": false}, > > {"emulated": true, "version": 2, "kernel": true}]} > > Reminder: I still need confirmation from the libvirt folks > that this API meets their needs, and review from somebody > on the QEMU QMP protocol design side. This should go into > 2.6 but we are getting closer to hardfreeze... Hi, Peter, Regarding to QMP part, I have got review comments from Eric/Markus, and will do more spins if necessary (latest v6). For libvirt part, Andrea should be the one to finish the libvirt part of this feature, so I am considering him to be the libvirt guy. Do you think we need more review besides CCed, especially on libvirt part? Thanks. -- peterx From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41965) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aibaK-0002eg-Df for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 01:44:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aibaJ-0004zE-Fi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 01:44:00 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 13:43:40 +0800 From: Peter Xu Message-ID: <20160323054340.GI28183@pxdev.xzpeter.org> References: <1458271654-23706-1-git-send-email-peterx@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 0/5] ARM: add query-gic-capabilities SMP command List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Wei Huang , Andrew Jones , Markus Armbruster , Michael Roth , QEMU Developers , qemu-arm , Andrea Bolognani On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 02:49:19PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 18 March 2016 at 03:27, Peter Xu wrote: > > This patch is to add ARM-specific command "query-gic-capability". > > > > The new command can report which kind of GIC device the host/QEMU > > support. The returned result is in the form of array. > > > > Sample command and output: > > > > {"execute": "query-gic-capability"} > > {"return": [{"emulated": false, "version": 3, "kernel": false}, > > {"emulated": true, "version": 2, "kernel": true}]} > > Reminder: I still need confirmation from the libvirt folks > that this API meets their needs, and review from somebody > on the QEMU QMP protocol design side. This should go into > 2.6 but we are getting closer to hardfreeze... Hi, Peter, Regarding to QMP part, I have got review comments from Eric/Markus, and will do more spins if necessary (latest v6). For libvirt part, Andrea should be the one to finish the libvirt part of this feature, so I am considering him to be the libvirt guy. Do you think we need more review besides CCed, especially on libvirt part? Thanks. -- peterx