On Tue, 21 Aug 2012 00:34:59 +0200, Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 21.08.2012, at 00:28, Peter Maydell wrote: > > > On 20 August 2012 23:18, Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> My question still holds. Why not use ONE_REG for this? What advantage > >> does GET/SET_MSRS give you? > > > > It lets you set more than one register at once, and it follows > > the pattern x86 already has (with a GET, SET, and a LIST_INDEX > > for finding out what the kernel actually supports). > > Maybe we should sit down and generalize those features and make them > available to everyone rather than shoehorning ARM into an x86 only > ioctl then? See, you tried to create a generic ioctl, and failed. So you have a PPC specific one. And you're smarter than us. If we try to create a generic ioctl, we too will fail, and end up with an ARM-specific one. Now, if Anthony and Avi lay down the law and say everyone is moving to a new system, we'll move now. For real: I want to see x86 patches. Otherwise, we'll concentrate on stuff we know, and transition when everyone else does. And since that transition is likely to be painful and of no real benefit, it might never happen. Sorry, Rusty. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/kvmarm
