From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: PPC: Add generic single register ioctls
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 13:07:03 -0600
Message-ID: <4F0B3AD7.9050609@freescale.com>
References: <02FFD6E9-1301-4A05-8F1F-913BE1677A90@suse.de> <1325823314-12758-1-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de> <4F074C45.5000507@freescale.com> <FC1F2E3F-AF70-4DC6-BB37-5CA26E4EAC82@suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "<kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org>" <kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org>,
	kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from ch1ehsobe001.messaging.microsoft.com ([216.32.181.181]:4923
	"EHLO ch1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751013Ab2AITHI (ORCPT
	<rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 9 Jan 2012 14:07:08 -0500
In-Reply-To: <FC1F2E3F-AF70-4DC6-BB37-5CA26E4EAC82@suse.de>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On 01/06/2012 06:52 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> 
> 
> On 06.01.2012, at 20:32, Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 01/05/2012 10:15 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>>> +/*
>>> + * Architecture specific registers are to be defined in arch headers and
>>> + * ORed with the arch identifier.
>>> + */
>>> +#define KVM_REG_PPC        0x1000000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_X86        0x2000000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_IA64        0x3000000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_ARM        0x4000000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_S390        0x5000000000000000ULL
>>> +
>>> +#define KVM_REG_SIZE_SHIFT    52
>>> +#define KVM_REG_SIZE_MASK    0x00f0000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_SIZE_U8        0x0000000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_SIZE_U16    0x0010000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_SIZE_U32    0x0020000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_SIZE_U64    0x0030000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_SIZE_U128    0x0040000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_SIZE_U256    0x0050000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_SIZE_U512    0x0060000000000000ULL
>>> +#define KVM_REG_SIZE_U1024    0x0070000000000000ULL
>>
>> Why not just encode directly as number of bytes?
> 
> Because this is 1 << n bytes :)

Some registers may not be a power-of-2 number of bytes (e.g. x86 segment
descriptors), and we've got plenty of space to spare in the id.

It's probably not worth another respin, though -- we can just document
right/left justification in the event that we have such a register.

-Scott