Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH/RFC] Per-architecture hypercall definitions

2007-10-11 Thread Avi Kivity
Christian Borntraeger wrote: Currently kvm provides hypercalls only for x86* architectures. To provide hypercall infrastructure for other kvm architectures I split kvm_para.h into a generic header file and architecture specific definitions. Currently there are definitions for s390

[kvm-devel] [PATCH/RFC] Per-architecture hypercall definitions

2007-10-11 Thread Christian Borntraeger
Currently kvm provides hypercalls only for x86* architectures. To provide hypercall infrastructure for other kvm architectures I split kvm_para.h into a generic header file and architecture specific definitions. Currently there are definitions for s390 (experimental, ABI not final, and I still

Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH/RFC] Per-architecture hypercall definitions

2007-10-11 Thread Anthony Liguori
Christian Borntraeger wrote: --- include/asm-s390/kvm_para.h | 128 include/asm-x86/kvm_para.h | 110 + include/linux/kvm_para.h| 112 -- 3 files changed, 251

Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH/RFC] Per-architecture hypercall definitions

2007-10-11 Thread Christian Borntraeger
+/* Return values for hypercalls */ +#define KVM_ENOSYS 1000 errno's can probably be in common code, right? Yes, they can. Will move. I originally had one of these in my paravirt_ops implementation but quickly found that the code it produced was pretty ugly. I think:

Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH/RFC] Per-architecture hypercall definitions

2007-10-11 Thread Anthony Liguori
Christian Borntraeger wrote: I agree. It seems I can simply remove the kvm_hypercall macro. Here is the updated patch (without the s390 parts. Will send them later when ready) and the changes mentioned above. Avi, Anthony, comments? It looks good to me. Regards, Anthony Liguori