Re: [PATCH v5 01/12] KVM: ARM: Introduce KVM_SET_DEVICE_ADDRESS ioctl

Alexander Graf
2013-01-09T15:28:10Z

On 09.01.2013, at 16:22, Marc Zyngier wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Jan 2013 15:11:39 +0000, Peter Maydell
> <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
> wrote:
>> On 9 January 2013 14:58, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yeah, that was the basic idea. Considering that the patch set hasn't
>>> been going
>>> in for another 2 months after that discussion indicates that this isn't
>>> too much of
>>> an issue though :).
>>
>> We might get there faster if people didn't keep nitpicking the APIs at
> the
>> last minute :-)
>
> Exactly. We're trying hard to get the damned thing merged, and the
> permanent API churn quickly becomes a burden.

As I said earlier, we have had a lot of experience in creating really bad APIs in the past.

But how about making this one specific? Call it KVM_ARM_SET_VGIC_ADDRESS, keep the rest as it is, resend it, and later we can come up with an actually generic interface.

Alex

>
> My understanding was that a consensus was reached 2 months ago. Has
> something fundamentally changed? Something that makes this API invalid? If
> not, can we please keep this one?
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
> --
> Who you jivin' with that Cosmik Debris?