On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:49:31AM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 15.03.2016 10:43, David Gibson wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 08:14:59PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> >> On 14.03.2016 17:56, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> >>> From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> >>>
> >>> We don't give them a KVM re
On 15.03.2016 10:43, David Gibson wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 08:14:59PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> On 14.03.2016 17:56, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>>> From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
>>>
>>> We don't give them a KVM reg number to most of the registers yet as no
>>> current KVM version support
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 08:14:59PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 14.03.2016 17:56, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> > From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> >
> > We don't give them a KVM reg number to most of the registers yet as no
> > current KVM version supports HV mode. For DAWR and DAWRX, the KVM reg
>
On 14.03.2016 17:56, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
>
> We don't give them a KVM reg number to most of the registers yet as no
> current KVM version supports HV mode. For DAWR and DAWRX, the KVM reg
> number is needed since this register can be set by the guest via the
> H
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
We don't give them a KVM reg number to most of the registers yet as no
current KVM version supports HV mode. For DAWR and DAWRX, the KVM reg
number is needed since this register can be set by the guest via the
H_SET_MODE hypercall.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmi
