From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Kiszka Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: x86: Extend KVM_SET_VCPU_EVENTS with selective updates Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:43:27 +0100 Message-ID: <4B27BCAF.70804@web.de> References: <4B1BE216.2090407@web.de> <4B1BE452.6090107@redhat.com> <4B1BE8BF.7030404@web.de> <20091208140249.GA19154@amt.cnet> <4B1E5DA4.3010605@redhat.com> <20091208205240.GA24565@amt.cnet> <4B1EC252.9040009@web.de> <4B27A223.1050706@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigEE5BD1741C497DBA9D1D7829" Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , kvm , Gleb Natapov To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from fmmailgate01.web.de ([217.72.192.221]:54686 "EHLO fmmailgate01.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755876AbZLOQnd (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:43:33 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B27A223.1050706@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigEE5BD1741C497DBA9D1D7829 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Avi Kivity wrote: > On 12/08/2009 11:17 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> >>> I don't see the need for setting any state in kvm_vcpu_events >>> automatically, on kernel entry (apparently there was consensus that >>> saving similar state explicitly in qemu was the way to go). >>> =20 >> (I don't think so. IMHO the cleaner way is to avoid loading critical >> states unless we are resetting or vmloading.) >> >> =20 >=20 > I now agree. But instead of SCOPE_RESET and SCOPE_RUNTIME (or whatever= > that was), how about SCOPE_GPR, SCOPE_FPU, SCOPE_SREGS etc. That means= > the backing code in kvm.c doesn't have to know what qemu is interested > in wrt SCOPE_RESET, and it's easier for readers to infer what is meant.= That's not my idea. I want to be able to state the scope in generic, arch-independent, KVM-unaware code. What the scope actually means /wrt writeback should only be defined in the arch-specific kvm service implementing it. Your suggestion would go in the wrong direction IMO. Jan --------------enigEE5BD1741C497DBA9D1D7829 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAksnvLEACgkQitSsb3rl5xSvMwCcDLs8HM7X298q5k8V4pX+OI5S aaEAn0hx/V6qS8Dlu1CHuM4ZxZSWri1c =ljwb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigEE5BD1741C497DBA9D1D7829--