From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2][RFC] Kernel changes for HPET legacy mode (v7) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:56:25 +0300 Message-ID: <4A3F4739.7070904@redhat.com> References: <1245329246-17526-1-git-send-email-eak@us.ibm.com> <1245329246-17526-3-git-send-email-eak@us.ibm.com> <4A3A8FC0.1000606@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Beth Kon , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Kiszka Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:44800 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755564AbZFVIzg (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 04:55:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4A3A8FC0.1000606@web.de> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/18/2009 10:04 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Hmm, stead of introducing a new pair of singe-purpose IOCTLs, why not > add KVM_GET/SET_PIT2 which exchanges an extended kvm_pit_state2. And > that struct should also include some flags field and enough padding to > be potentially extended yet again in the future. In that case I see no > problem having also a mode read-back interface. > We'd only add kernel hpet if we were forced to (I imagine the same applications/kernels that forced the PIT into the kernel will do the same for HPET). -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function