From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39289)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benh@kernel.crashing.org>) id 1TKEwq-0005Y8-49
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:56:40 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benh@kernel.crashing.org>) id 1TKEwp-0002vn-7c
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:56:40 -0400
Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:52991)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benh@kernel.crashing.org>) id 1TKEwo-0002vg-UN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2012 16:56:39 -0400
Message-ID: <1349470586.4260.75.camel@pasglop>
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2012 06:56:26 +1000
In-Reply-To: <AB3B4A2BF00C7341A4ADB28108160A9E02A26B86@AMSACEX4.americas.ad.flextronics.com>
References: <CAF+Cadt0BoZtRByGVP2rFgSNaDNn6B=O4h3uON4HwUDSWR27bA@mail.gmail.com>
	<5050B005.9080500@suse.de> <1347486505.2276.13.camel@pasglop>
	<878vbl7zgd.fsf@codemonkey.ws>
	<AB3B4A2BF00C7341A4ADB28108160A9E02A26B86@AMSACEX4.americas.ad.flextronics.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Enablig DLPAR capacity on QEMU pSeries
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Erlon Cruz <Erlon.Cruz@fit-tecnologia.org.br>
Cc: Erlon Cruz <erlon.cruz@br.flextronics.com>, David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Fri, 2012-10-05 at 08:26 -0700, Erlon Cruz wrote:
> >
> > Why not add a proper RTAS and do this work there?
> 
> The RTAS call is how the guest will communicate with the host. It 
> doesn't have a way to get interrupted and notified about any changes.
> So 
> to start the changing of something, the guest need some kind of
> trigger

I believe the question was more about where we put the resource
allocation.

The interrupt problem remains in any case yes, but inventing a new RTAT
event interrupt (or hijacking EPOW) isn't a big deal. 

Cheers,
Ben.