Re: RFC/patch portability: split kvm_vm_ioctl v3

[Carsten Otte <cotte-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Why KVM_IRQ_LINE is X86b specific? The original idea are based on ACPI spec which
>> I assume to be generic though S390 may not take.
>>
>>   
> 
> ia64 can probably share much. ppc will probably want KVM_IRQ_LINE with
> with different parameters. s390, as far as I understand, will not.
I think we'll have to come up with a more modular approach later on: 
various aspects are of interest to various architectures and/or 
platforms. The generic kernel has CONFIG_FEATURE toggles for that.
The portability patches are not intended to split kvm into components 
at this stage, I believe that is something that we will have to come 
up when actual ports are being integrated. In my optinion, a 
reasonable next-step refinement here would be to come up with a 
generic interrupt injection call that can inject an interrupt on any 
architecture and platform. After userspace has adopted to use that 
one, we can keep the old call for backward compatibility reasons in a 
deprecated state for some time before removing it.
For now, my goal is to seperate what is generic in a way that it is a 
functionality that a portable user space program that uses kvm can 
expect to work the same way on all architectures and platforms.

so long,
Carsten


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/