From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc: Define the hcall opcodes & return values we need Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 12:33:52 +0200 Message-ID: <55893610.7050309@redhat.com> References: <1434698461-15539-1-git-send-email-mpe@ellerman.id.au> <558927F5.1040401@redhat.com> <1435053939.20070.2.camel@ellerman.id.au> <5589358F.1080606@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Will Deacon , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org" , "svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "matt@ozlabs.org" To: Andre Przywara , Michael Ellerman Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44997 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753437AbbFWKd4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2015 06:33:56 -0400 In-Reply-To: <5589358F.1080606@arm.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 23/06/2015 12:31, Andre Przywara wrote: >> > >> > Because it's not part of the kernel API, never was, still isn't. > Technically it may not - if I get this correctly it is more a platform > API defined by the architecture, like ACPI or PSCI on ARM. > But if I get this correctly Linux re-uses those definitions in the KVM > API, by piggy-backing on the existing hypercalls. Please correct me if I > am wrong here, I am looking at arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c, where it > seems to trap those hypercalls. > > So I think that - though not originally invented or defined by Linux - > it should export those definitions that KVM (re-)uses. > QEMU also has a header file duplicating those definitions, so I support > the idea of an uapi header. Right, the same is true for other headers: include/scsi/scsi.h and include/uapi/linux/virtio_*.h come to mind. Paolo