From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/15] KVM: Add support for enabling capabilities per-vcpu Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:51:13 +0100 Message-ID: <4B9500D1.2060008@suse.de> References: <1267807842-3751-1-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de> <1267807842-3751-15-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de> <4B950057.1090204@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-ppc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, kvm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Avi Kivity Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4B950057.1090204-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: kvm-ppc-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Avi Kivity wrote: > On 03/05/2010 06:50 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> } >> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm.h b/include/linux/kvm.h >> index ce28767..c7ed3cb 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/kvm.h >> +++ b/include/linux/kvm.h >> @@ -400,6 +400,12 @@ struct kvm_ioeventfd { >> __u8 pad[36]; >> }; >> >> +/* for KVM_ENABLE_CAP */ >> +struct kvm_enable_cap { >> + /* in */ >> + __u32 cap; >> > > Reserve space here. Add a flags field and check it for zeros. Flags? How about something like u64 args[4] That way the capability enabling code could decide what to do with the arguments. We don't always only need flags I suppose?. Alex