From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/kvm: support to handle sw breakpoint
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 11:25:01 +0200
Message-ID: <53A0096D.3020108@suse.de>
References: <1402780097-28827-1-git-send-email-maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>	 <53A0022D.5020108@suse.de> <1402996939.7661.126.camel@pasglop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, paulus@samba.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Return-path: <kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1402996939.7661.126.camel@pasglop>
Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org


On 17.06.14 11:22, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 10:54 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Also, why don't we use twi always or something else that actually is
>> defined as illegal instruction? I would like to see this shared with
>> book3s_32 PR.
> twi will be directed to the guest on HV no ? We want a real illegal
> because those go to the host (for potential emulation by the HV).

Ah, good point. I guess we need different one for PR and HV then to 
ensure compatibility with older ISAs on PR.


Alex

> I'm
> trying to see if I can get the architect to set one in stone in a future
> proof way.
>
> Cheers,
> Ben.
>