From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] KVM: PPC: Add support for multiple-TCE hcalls Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 22:40:18 +1000 Message-ID: <1373546418.19894.88.camel@pasglop> References: <1373123227-22969-1-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru> <1373123227-22969-7-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru> <51DC4228.7010607@suse.de> <51DCEA76.9070808@ozlabs.ru> <51DE3ECB.7080803@ozlabs.ru> <43E93931-F213-47CC-ADCF-D3A6D6BC4372@suse.de> <51DE8EE9.2000508@ozlabs.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Alexey Kardashevskiy , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, David Gibson , Paul Mackerras , Alex Williamson , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org To: Alexander Graf Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2013-07-11 at 13:15 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > There are 2 ways of dealing with this: > > 1) Call the ENABLE_CAP on every vcpu. That way one CPU may handle > this hypercall in the kernel while another one may not. The same as we > handle PAPR today. > > 2) Create a new ENABLE_CAP for the vm. > > I think in this case option 1 is fine - it's how we handle everything > else already. So, you are now asking him to chose between a gross horror or adding a new piece of infrastructure for something that is entirely pointless to begin with ? Come on, give him a break. That stuff is fine as it is. Ben.