From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753509Ab1AZPO3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:14:29 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:32863 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753187Ab1AZPO2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:14:28 -0500 Message-ID: <4D403A4F.6090707@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 17:14:23 +0200 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc14 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Glauber Costa CC: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aliguori@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/16] KVM-HDR: KVM Userspace registering ioctl References: <1295892397-11354-1-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com> <1295892397-11354-4-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com> <4D400180.2080305@redhat.com> <1296044072.15920.48.camel@mothafucka.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1296044072.15920.48.camel@mothafucka.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/26/2011 02:14 PM, Glauber Costa wrote: > On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 13:12 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 01/24/2011 08:06 PM, Glauber Costa wrote: > > > KVM, which stands for KVM Virtual Memory (I wanted to call it KVM Virtual Mojito), > > > is a piece of shared memory that is visible to both the hypervisor and the guest > > > kernel - but not the guest userspace. > > > > > > The basic idea is that the guest can tell the hypervisor about a specific > > > piece of memory, and what it expects to find in there. This is a generic > > > abstraction, that goes to userspace (qemu) if KVM (the hypervisor) can't > > > handle a specific request, thus giving us flexibility in some features > > > in the future. > > > > > > KVM (The hypervisor) can change the contents of this piece of memory at > > > will. This works well with paravirtual information, and hopefully > > > normal guest memory - like last update time for the watchdog, for > > > instance. > > > > > > This patch contains the header part of the userspace communication implementation. > > > Userspace can query the presence/absence of this feature in the normal way. > > > It also tells the hypervisor that it is capable of handling - in whatever > > > way it chooses, registrations that the hypervisor does not know how to. > > > In x86, only user so far, this mechanism is implemented as generic userspace > > > msr exit, that could theorectically be used to implement msr-handling in > > > userspace. > > > > > > I am keeping the headers separate to facilitate backports to people > > > who wants to backport the kernel part but not the hypervisor, or the other way around. > > > > > > > Again the protocol is not specified. How about starting from > > Documentation/kvm/api.txt so we don't have to guess? > I will do that in the next version, if the idea is not shoot up > completely. For some reason people write the code first and the documentation as an afterthought. If you switch the order, you can get a high level review first, followed by a low-level code review once the high level details are agreed. Of course it's hard to do major changes this way, since the API often evolves while writing the code. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function