Re: [PATCH v3 00/16] KVM: arm64: GICv3 ITS emulation

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 18 March 2016 at 09:40, Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 06:20:36PM +0000, Andre Przywara wrote:
>> Well, probably there is not so much difference. I was just wondering if
>> it would be easier to treat that data as an opaque blob.
>> But you are probably right that it would just mean the difference
>> between documenting the format or not.

> Even ignoring the migrate-to-TCG case, you cannot treat it as a blob,
> because you want to be able to migrate between KVM on kernel version X
> and version Y.

You could require userspace to treat it as an opaque blob, and
transparently handle any version-upgrade within the kernel.
I think having it be documented-to-userspace ABI makes it
clearer that any format changes are a Big Deal, though.

thanks
-- PMM
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux