From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rusty Russell Subject: Re: [RFC 0/5] Making KVM_GET_ONE_REG/KVM_SET_ONE_REG generic. Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:14:09 +0930 Message-ID: <87pq60hqmu.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> References: <877gsia8rm.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <87627y3p1r.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <87ipbtj77o.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Avi Kivity , Christoffer Dall , Alexander Graf , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm-devel To: Peter Maydell Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:34170 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755345Ab2IFDA4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Sep 2012 23:00:56 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Peter Maydell writes: > On 5 September 2012 07:48, Rusty Russell wrote: >> Peter Maydell writes: >>> I could live with "always read/write 64 bits". I definitely don't >>> want to have to deal with matching up register widths to accesses >>> in userspace, please. >> >> I changed my mind about the old scheme when I realized we have to deal >> with 128-bit FPU registers. > > Mmm, ARM might not have any awkward size registers but there's > x86 weirdisms to consider for a generic ABI I guess. Actually, I hadn't realized ARM didn't do 128-bit FP regs already. But I'd guess they'll arrive one day. Cheers, Rusty.