From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH  -v2] Monitor command: pfa2hva, translate guest physical
 address to host virtual address
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2010 21:37:38 -0600
Message-ID: <4CD77082.1000207@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <1288060789.2862.336.camel@yhuang-dev> <20101101160952.GE1429@amt.cnet>	<4CCF0BAB.9000304@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1288639205.2059.34.camel@yhuang-mobile> <4CCF136D.5080307@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4CD58121.2040209@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Dean Nelson <dnelson@redhat.com>,
	Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from e6.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.146]:50871 "EHLO e6.ny.us.ibm.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751876Ab0KHDhq (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 7 Nov 2010 22:37:46 -0500
Received: from d01relay01.pok.ibm.com (d01relay01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.233])
	by e6.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id oA83cbgO027096
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 22:38:37 -0500
Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64])
	by d01relay01.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id oA83bjVW392802
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 22:37:45 -0500
Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1])
	by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id oA83biOQ017757
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Sun, 7 Nov 2010 22:37:44 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4CD58121.2040209@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On 11/06/2010 11:24 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 11/01/2010 03:22 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> On 11/01/2010 02:20 PM, Huang Ying wrote:
>>> Yes. As general interface, it may not work so well, but as test
>>> interface, it works quite well and useful.
>>>
>>> Do we have any mechanism to add a test only interface?
>>
>> I'd like to see what Luiz/Markus think but definitely only a human 
>> monitor interface and probably prefix the command with a 'x-' prefix 
>> to indicate that it's not a supported interface.
>>
>
> Automated testing will want to use qmp.

The command is inherently racy so if you tried to implement an automated 
unit test, you'd get false

>> The documentation should be very clear about the limitations of the 
>> interface and the intended use-case.
>>
>
> Perhaps a { execute: 'enable-version-specific-commands', arguments: 
> ['pfa2hva'] } ?
>