On 23/01/20 15:45, Alexander Graf wrote: > I think we're in agreement then, just leaning onto the other side of the > same fence. My take is that if I don't know whether a string is > necessary, I'd rather not have a string :). And for me it's if I don't know whether a #define is necessary, I'd rather not have a #define. So yeah we agree on everything except the userspace API (which is no small thing, but it's a start). > I guess as long as we do get stat information out per-vm as well as > per-vcpu through vmfd and vcpufd, I'm happy overall. > > So how strongly do you feel about the string based approach? I like it, of course. > PS: You could btw easily add a "give me the string for a ONE_REG id" > interface in KVM to translate from 0x10042 to "insn_emulation_fail" :). That could actually be somewhat useful for VCPU registers as well (give me the string and type, and a list of valid ONE_REG ids). If that was the case, of course it would be fine for me to use ONE_REG on a VM. The part which I don't like is having to make all ONE_REG part of the userspace ABI/API. Paolo
