If userspace wants to change some specific bits of TSR
(timer status register) then it uses GET/SET_SREGS ioctl interface.
So the steps will be:
i) user-space will make get ioctl,
ii) change TSR in userspace
iii) then make set ioctl.
It can happen that TSR gets changed by kerne
This is done so that same function can be called from SREGS and
ONE_REG interface (follow up patch).
Signed-off-by: Bharat Bhushan
---
v3:
- kvmppc_set_tsr() marked static function as this is not called
outside of booke.c
v2: No change
arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c | 24 ++
This patchset adds the one_reg interface to get/set
TSR and TCR registers.This patchet also adds the one_reg
interface to or/clear specific bits in TSR register.
v3:
- kvmppc_set_tsr() marked static function as this is not called
outside of booke.c
v2:
- Added Documentation
Bharat Bhushan (
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 02:21:59PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> Copying Christoffer since ARM has in kernel irq chip too.
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:49:15PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> > Currently, devices that are emulated inside KVM are configured in a
> > hardcoded manner based on an assumpt
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 04:58:54PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> This is probably a stupid question, but why the
> KVM_SET_IRQCHIP/KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING interface is not appropriate for
> your purposes?
>
> x86 sets up a default GSI->IRQCHIP PIN mapping on creation (during
> KVM_SET_IRQCHIP), but
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 08:17:54PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 02/21/2013 02:22:09 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 08:05:12PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> >> On 02/20/2013 07:09:49 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >> >On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 03:16:37PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> >> >>
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 06:20:51PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 02/20/2013 01:58:54 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >This is probably a stupid question, but why the
> >KVM_SET_IRQCHIP/KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING interface is not appropriate for
> >your purposes?
> >
> >x86 sets up a default GSI->IRQCHIP PIN
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 18:16:53 -0800, Christoffer Dall
wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Scott Wood
> wrote:
>> We at least need the numberspace to not be architecture-specific if we
>> want
>> to retain the possibility of changing later -- not to mention what
>> happens
>> if architectu