Re: [PATCH 0 of 3] RFC: creating a particular vcpu type

[Hollis Blanchard <hollisb-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 12:05 -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> 
> Hollis Blanchard wrote:
> > If it's the "ioctl" in the function name you object to, that's
> easily
> > changed.
> >   
> 
> It's not the name, it's what you're doing.  You're introducing an 
> architecture specific ioctl that essentially overrides an 
> common-ioctl().

No, I am introducing an architecture-specific ioctl that shares common
code, which after all is the goal.

> If anything, I would think it would be better to expand the existing
> common-ioctl with the notion and then have a 
> per-architecture hook within that ioctl.

I *am* expanding the common ioctl. I am also preserving the existing
ABI: CREATE_VCPU still works, and CREATE_VCPU_TYPE is the new ioctl. And
then, voila, we have an architecture-specific hook:
kvm_arch_vcpu_create().

I will happily move the KVM_CREATE_VCPU_TYPE case from
kvm_arch_vm_ioctl() to kvm_vm_ioctl(), and since the additional
parameter is necessarily architecture-specific, it will simply call
kvm_arch_vcpu_create_type().

-- 
Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/