Re: [PATCH 4/4] KVM: x86: Add VCPU substate for NMI states

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 891 bytes --]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/15/2009 01:27 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> Perhaps it makes sense to query about individual states, including
>>> existing ones?  That will allow us to deprecate and then phase out
>>> broken states.  It's probably not worth it.
>>>      
>> You may do this already with the given design: Set up a VCPU, then issue
>> KVM_GET_VCPU_STATE on the substate in question. You will either get an
>> error code or 0 if the substate is supported. At least no additional
>> kernel code required.
>>    
> 
> No, if some code requires a feature, we don't want to set up a guest and 
> a vcpu and issue dummy commands in order to find out if we can actually 
> run that code.
> 
> Feature discovery needs to be a 'system ioctl' in the words of 
> Documentation/kvm/api.txt.
> 

OK, added some system IOCTL 'KVM_GET_VCPU_STATE_LIST' to my to-do list.

Jan


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 257 bytes --]