From: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
To: Eric Auger <eric.auger@linaro.org>,
Pavel Fedin <p.fedin@samsung.com>,
"'Paolo Bonzini'" <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
'Gleb Natapov' <gleb@kernel.org>,
'Jan Kiszka' <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
'Marcelo Tosatti' <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
"kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Extensions for KVM MSI related ioctls
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 15:29:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55A3CB59.80906@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55A3CA17.1010500@linaro.org>
Hi,
On 13/07/15 15:24, Eric Auger wrote:
> On 07/13/2015 03:32 PM, Pavel Fedin wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>>> I think I prefer the flag. Offhand it sounds easier to add support for
>>> it to non-ARM architectures, compared to KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_EXTENDED_MSI.
>>
>> Actually i also voted for flag, because it is already introduced in (2), and i'm not a fan of
>> adding new definitions where we can reuse existing ones. IMHO using flag would make an API more
>> consistent.
>
> OK I will respin with user space flag.
>
> Andre, what about the kernel routing entry struct. You wanted me to get
> rid of KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_EXTENDED_MSI there too. Will you be able to
> manage a usespace wrong setting if the type is not set?
I am about to see how this all fits together, but I don't expect any
serious problems, at least on the kvmtool side.
Instead of setting a different type I just set the flag and guard that
by the capability: should be not an issue.
Cheers,
Andre.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-13 14:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-13 10:25 Extensions for KVM MSI related ioctls Andre Przywara
2015-07-13 12:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-07-13 13:32 ` Pavel Fedin
2015-07-13 14:24 ` Eric Auger
2015-07-13 14:29 ` Andre Przywara [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=55A3CB59.80906@arm.com \
--to=andre.przywara@arm.com \
--cc=eric.auger@linaro.org \
--cc=gleb@kernel.org \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=p.fedin@samsung.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).