Jeff Dike wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 11:28:18AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Within the kernel right (VMCALL is only usable in ring 1).
Yup.
Is it
terribly important to be able to pass through the syscall arguments in
registers verses packing them in a data structure and pa
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 11:28:18AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Within the kernel right (VMCALL is only usable in ring 1).
Yup.
> Is it
> terribly important to be able to pass through the syscall arguments in
> registers verses packing them in a data structure and passing a pointer
> to t
Jeff Dike wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 09:15:51AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
I'm planning on breaking this interface again since the new hypercall
API only takes 4 arguments instead of 6.
Is anything written anywhere about this hypercall interface?
I've posted patches. I'll
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 09:15:51AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> I'm planning on breaking this interface again since the new hypercall
> API only takes 4 arguments instead of 6.
Is anything written anywhere about this hypercall interface?
The thing which would make me happy (which the current
Avi Kivity wrote:
Jeff Dike wrote:
Add the hypercall number to kvm_run and initialize it. This might be
considered API-changing, so I kept it separate.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Dike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
drivers/kvm/kvm_main.c |1 +
include/linux/kvm.h|1 +
2 files changed, 2 inser
5 matches
Mail list logo