From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [STRAWMAN PATCH] KVM: PPC: Add ioctl to specify interrupt controller architecture to emulate Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 17:53:23 -0500 Message-ID: <1363301603.28440.20@snotra> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; delsp=Yes; format=Flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: Paul Mackerras , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org" , Gleb Natapov , Stuart Yoder To: Alexander Graf Return-path: In-Reply-To: (from agraf@suse.de on Thu Mar 14 17:44:39 2013) Content-Disposition: inline Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 03/14/2013 05:44:39 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 14.03.2013, at 23:02, Paul Mackerras wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 01:15:35PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > >> On 03/13/2013 08:26:20 PM, Paul Mackerras wrote: > > > >>> I arbitrarily > >>> assigned 0x58494353 for KVM_CAP_IRQ_XICS as the args[0] value to > >>> indicate XICS. > >> > >> Why is it called KVM_CAP_ if it's not a capability? > > > > Because it's associated with a capability. I'm not wedded to the > name. > > > >>> I think it would be better if we don't have to get a > >>> new capability number assigned every time we want to add a new > type of > >>> interrupt controller. > >> > >> How often does it really happen? If a simple enumeration is good > >> enough for identifying the main IRQ controller device type, it > >> should be good enough for identifying the vcpu irq arch. > > > > Whatever. I really don't care at this point, I'm just getting > > extremely tired of the bikeshedding. If you don't like it, propose > > something. > > So far most comments I've seen haven't been bikeshedding, but each > and every one got us closer to something that we can hopefully rely > on for the next few years. > > However, I agree. Scott, you seem to have a pretty good picture by > now on how this should look like. Could you please take this patch as > a basis, make each controller type its own CAP and have the > enable_cap pass a token (fd) to the interrupt controller the CPU > should get connected to? I think we're getting very close to having > something that looks gorgeous. Sure. -Scott