On 6 April 2011 20:00, Luiz Capitulino <lcapitul...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 20:17:47 +0200 > Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> wrote: >> HMP is currently x86-only, thus it's probably OK to model it after some >> PC feature (though I don't know if there aren't NMI buttons with BP-only >> wirings). But will the consolidate version be defined for all >> architectures? We should avoid "exporting" x86-specific assumptions. > > Right, but honestly speaking, I don't know how this works for other arches. > > So, the best thing to do is to have a general design that can be used > by any architecture. Of course that we can also add a new command later > if needed.
Well, I'm not sure "send a random interrupt to the core" makes much sense for ARM... So what are we actually trying to model here? Some sort of way to do "press a front panel switch" via remote monitor protocol? I guess you could have an API for boards to register any switches they had... -- PMM -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
