From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:44609) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RXF2a-0004HC-OR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 04 Dec 2011 11:35:49 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RXF2Z-00047y-SC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 04 Dec 2011 11:35:48 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:43100) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RXF2Z-00047u-GY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 04 Dec 2011 11:35:47 -0500 Message-ID: <4EDBA15E.3060309@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 18:35:42 +0200 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4EDB762C.7090909@redhat.com> <4EDB78DE.6000109@web.de> <4EDB7A74.4060804@redhat.com> <4EDB7ADC.50906@web.de> <4EDB7DE2.2050301@redhat.com> <4EDB7E62.7090909@web.de> <4EDB8DDE.5040402@redhat.com> <4EDB8F7C.1070602@web.de> In-Reply-To: <4EDB8F7C.1070602@web.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH 14/16] kvm: x86: Add user space part for in-kernel i8259 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: Anthony Liguori , kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Marcelo Tosatti , qemu-devel , Blue Swirl On 12/04/2011 05:19 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > > In the sense that kernel-apic is just an accelerated apic. From the > > guest point of view, there's no difference, and that should be reflected > > in the device model. > > That was my goal as well: The guest should not notice the difference, > but the admin on the host side should still be able to tell both > internally fairly different models apart. This should be some attribute, not the name. > Plus the code should be > clearly split where there are differences and explicitly shared where > there aren't. That's a good goal, yes. > > > > > If I'm reading an apic register, either from the guest or via a monitor > > debug interface, I shouldn't care whether it's accelerated or not. The > > guest part already holds, of course. > > Specifically for the debug scenario, I'd prefer the clear > differentiation by name as there can always remain subtle differences in > the implementation of kernel vs. user space. Someone debugging the guest > and/or qemu/kvm should remain aware of this. Aware, yes, but the name change is too drastic. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function