Jes Sorensen wrote: > Zhang, Xiantao wrote: >> Jes Sorensen wrote: >>> I am with Avi on this one - we shouldn't be passing in pointers like >>> that. Either we can increase the size of kvm_regs as you mention, >>> but it will become *huge* since the stack is 64KB, or we introduce >>> a new ioctl just to handle the stack. >>> >>> Do you think it would be a problem having the second ioctl for >>> this? I would prefer breaking it into two to avoid the kernel >>> having to allocate a 128KB chunk for kvm_regs. >> >> Fine to me to add the ioctl, and it should make the logic clear. >> Xiantao > > Cool, I'll look into that later today, I hope. I'll base it on your > old code, but I will not be able to test it :-) I just have the code of userspace for enabling live migration, and it should be a bit old. Maybe you can add the ioctl from the scratch to support the stack's save&restore, and If you need the userspace code, I will post it to u. :) Xiantao -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
