From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: PPC: Add support for IOMMU in-kernel handling Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 18:32:45 -0500 Message-ID: <1369870365.18630.48@snotra> References: <1369763138.18630.3@snotra> <51A53E20.3020205@ozlabs.ru> <1369784115.18630.27@snotra> <51A547F0.8090406@ozlabs.ru> <1369857949.18630.42@snotra> <51A68AE9.6070709@ozlabs.ru> <1369869272.18630.47@snotra> <51A68F49.6020908@ozlabs.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; delsp=Yes; format=Flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: David Gibson , , , , Alexander Graf , Paul Mackerras , To: Alexey Kardashevskiy Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51A68F49.6020908@ozlabs.ru> (from aik@ozlabs.ru on Wed May 29 18:29:13 2013) Content-Disposition: inline Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 05/29/2013 06:29:13 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > On 05/30/2013 09:14 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > > On 05/29/2013 06:10:33 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > >> On 05/30/2013 06:05 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > >> > But you didn't put it in the same section as > KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE. 0xe0 > >> > begins a different section. > >> > >> It is not really obvious that there are sections as no comment > defines > >> those :) > > > > There is a comment /* ioctls for fds returned by KVM_CREATE_DEVICE > */ > > > > Putting KVM_CREATE_DEVICE in there was mainly to avoid dealing with > the > > ioctl number conflict mess in the vm-ioctl section, but at least > that one > > is related to the device control API. :-) > > > >> But yes, makes sense to move it up a bit and change the code to > 0xad. > > > > 0xad is KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL > > That's it. I am _completely_ confused now. No system whatsoever :( > What rule should I use in order to choose the number for my new > ioctl? :) Yeah, it's a mess. 0xaf seems to be free. :-) -Scott