From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] kvm: KVM_IRQFD cleanup, docs, sanitize flags Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 18:52:46 +0300 Message-ID: <4FF1C3CE.3020404@redhat.com> References: <20120629154940.30535.17132.stgit@bling.home> <1341244311.1207.449.camel@bling.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mst@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com To: Alex Williamson , Marcelo Tosatti Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1341244311.1207.449.camel@bling.home> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 07/02/2012 06:51 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 09:56 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: >> Before we start fiddling with what we can and can't add to KVM_IRQFD >> we need to figure out if anyone has been sloppy in their use of the >> ioctl flags. This series has a minor cleanup to pass the struct >> kvm_irqfd to seup functions rather than individual parameters, making >> it more consistent with ioeventfd, adds API documentation for this >> ioctl, and sanitizes the flags. If anyone screams, we may have to >> revert this last patch. Thanks, > > Avi, what do you think about trying to get this in for 3.5 to test > whether we break anyone? Then we can aim for 3.6 for level irqfd & > eoifd support. Makes sense. Marcelo? -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function