Re: RFC/patch portability: split kvm_vm_ioctl

[Carsten Otte <cotte-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> We need to distinguish between x86 specific (only x86 has this) and s390
> special (everyone has it except s390). In the latter case it should
> still be in common code to avoid duplication, with a guard to disable
> compilation on s390.
> 
> KVM_SET_MEMORY_REGION is in theory applicable to non-s390 but I'd like
> to deprecate it, so there's no point in implementing it on non-x86. The
> rest are s390 special rather than x86 specific.
> 
> As related previously, KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION should work for s390
> (with an extra check for the guest phsyical start address).
I thought about that all through the weekend. To me, it looks like I 
want to eliminate "s390 special" as far as possible. In given case, 
I'll follow Anthonys suggestion and support 
KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION. KVM_SET_MEMORY_REGION will also go common, 
and in case we're pushing the actual port before you deprecate that 
call, we'll #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_S390 around it.

As for the pic/apic part, I think it is x86 specific. Christian 
Ehrhardt stated he believes ppc won't have that too.

Will create another patch on vm_ioctl that reflects this later today.

so long,
Carsten

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/