From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8B66C433EF for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:33:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:47008 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nK3ZV-0003wx-P6 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 14:33:09 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38266) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nK3N2-0006qG-TO; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 14:20:16 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:29722) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nK3N0-0005II-MC; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 14:20:16 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0187473.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 21FIZbXr035219; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:20:10 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : in-reply-to : references : date : message-id : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=vN9vvBnLnxNKZjjJgnj/PqzprbSj0oLOm9F/gLj5Da0=; b=phMC5/DeT3lqRxd4N//YNz6Oq5Q86gSAlicWpEzHBGQZ22RwwI91Qpq5mgviz6xezki2 3zLxC/OX6lTMMPCLll9gXr/zJfqJIlGUo2pAd6d/yVZ8K3weHdHmyHHi1rFVb5GyV5+W 3nQwYxZgBDC4UoyOlCqmbJIQ9tWU2vIkyZ7ev08EpwsN2qbKV7BW+LUgoFeAHslmFwH8 d6AfLaYCbQOUP1JnQrT+E1/aRVoxYaH+31sDkC5S8743GqFazFlePsB0DAfv58gols/0 v5KNab8u37uPSccnkCgT+Q+ZpU9LyLOZh6t7avDDNUom+Jl30Sd3Xh2lFTtqyIZ9Mexz ZQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3e8e8c6jmq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:20:10 +0000 Received: from m0187473.ppops.net (m0187473.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 21FIh8q7036374; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:20:09 GMT Received: from ppma04dal.us.ibm.com (7a.29.35a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.53.41.122]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3e8e8c6jmc-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:20:09 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 21FJDou6023448; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:20:09 GMT Received: from b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.20]) by ppma04dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3e64hbymty-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:20:09 +0000 Received: from b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.235]) by b03cxnp08028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 21FJK7YA36438502 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:20:07 GMT Received: from b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE2BB78076; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:20:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FA5778066; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:20:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost (unknown [9.211.143.123]) by b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:20:06 +0000 (GMT) From: Fabiano Rosas To: Daniel Henrique Barboza , =?utf-8?Q?C=C3=A9dric?= Le Goater , Nicholas Piggin , qemu-ppc@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] ppc: nested KVM HV for spapr virtual hypervisor In-Reply-To: References: <20220215031642.1691873-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <459593cb-6ab7-1998-687d-7b4b96f8cb97@kaod.org> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:20:04 -0300 Message-ID: <87iltgx7h7.fsf@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: X_iFKFyHQ2w1NCmY6z1z0qgAXzpaezAX X-Proofpoint-GUID: edB87-q-cjL5xA1RMIRfzF9Ek-1wtVce X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.816,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.62.513 definitions=2022-02-15_05,2022-02-14_04,2021-12-02_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=879 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2201110000 definitions=main-2202150111 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=148.163.156.1; envelope-from=farosas@linux.ibm.com; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Daniel Henrique Barboza writes: > On 2/15/22 15:33, C=C3=A9dric Le Goater wrote: >> On 2/15/22 04:16, Nicholas Piggin wrote: >>> Here is the rollup of patches in much better shape since the RFC. >>> I include the 2 first ones unchanged from independent submission >>> just to be clear that this series requires them. >>> >>> Thanks Cedric and Fabiano for wading through my poor quality RFC >>> code, very good changes suggested and I hope I got most of them >>> and this one is easier to follow. >>=20 >> This is in good shape and functional. I will try to propose a small >> buildroot environment for it, so that we don't have to start a full >> distro to test. >>=20 >> I would like to talk about the naming. KVM-HV is I think "reserved" >> to the PowerNV platform (baremetal). We also have KVM-PR which runs >> KVM guests on various platforms, including pseries. >>=20 >> How can we call this yet another KVM PPC implementation ? > > Do we need a new name? I believe Nick uses the stock kvm_hv kernel module= in this > implementation. > > If we want a name to differ between the different KVM-HV usages, well, I'= d suggest > KVM-EHV (Emulated HV) or KVM-NHV (Nested HV) or KVM-VHV (Virtual HV) or a= nything > that suggests that this is a different flavor of using KVM-HV. I'd say it's imperative to have a clear indication that this is TCG. Otherwise we'll have people trying to weird stuff with it and complaining that Nested KVM is bugged. Some ideas: Emulated Nested KVM Emulated Nested HV Nested TCG The first one is perhaps more accurate, but we'd end up having "kvm" mentioned in TCG code and that is super confusing.