Re: [PATCH 13/21] KVM: Add support for enabling capabilities per-vcpu

[Avi Kivity <avi-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On 04/01/2010 12:06 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 01.04.2010, at 10:51, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>    
>> On 03/24/2010 10:48 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>      
>>> Some times we don't want all capabilities to be available to all
>>> our vcpus. One example for that is the OSI interface, implemented
>>> in the next patch.
>>>
>>> In order to have a generic mechanism in how to enable capabilities
>>> individually, this patch introduces a new ioctl that can be used
>>> for this purpose. That way features we don't want in all guests or
>>> userspace configurations can just not be enabled and we're good.
>>>
>>>   Documentation/kvm/api.txt  |   35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   include/linux/kvm.h        |   12 ++++++++++++
>>>   3 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>> Should really have been generic instead of ppc-specific, but can be moved later.
>>      
> I didn't fully understand your comment about stuff being generic vs arch specific. But I assumed that since you know this ioctl exists now that whenever someone needs something similar now, it's easy to add support for it on other archs.
>    

There is nothing arch specific about the interface (though the various 
caps can be arch specific).  No need to add support, just move the code 
to virt/kvm and add an arch specific callout to handle the data.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function