Il 25/05/2013 04:45, David Gibson ha scritto:
>> >+ case KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU: {
>> >+ struct kvm_create_spapr_tce_iommu create_tce_iommu;
>> >+ struct kvm *kvm = filp->private_data;
>> >+
>> >+ r = -EFAULT;
>> >+ if (copy_from_user(&create_tce_iommu, argp,
>> >+ sizeof(create_tce_iommu)))
>> >+ goto out;
>> >+ r = kvm_vm_ioctl_create_spapr_tce_iommu(kvm,
>> >&create_tce_iommu);
>> >+ goto out;
>> >+ }
Would it make sense to make this the only interface for creating TCEs?
That is, pass both a window_size and an IOMMU group id (or e.g. -1 for
no hardware IOMMU usage), and have a single ioctl for both cases?
There's some duplicated code between kvm_vm_ioctl_create_spapr_tce and
kvm_vm_ioctl_create_spapr_tce_iommu.
KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE could stay for backwards-compatibility, or you
could just use a new capability and drop the old ioctl. I'm not sure
whether you're already considering the ABI to be stable for kvmppc.
Paolo
--
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
