On 07.12.2011, at 01:32, Matt Evans <matt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 06/12/11 19:22, Sasha Levin wrote: >> If KVM_RUN can actually return anything besides 0 or -1 it may be also >> worthwhile to update Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt . >> >> What are the cases where it happens? > > Well, on PPC the internal kvmppc_run_vcpu() returns either RESUME_GUEST (which > stays in-kernel and drops back to the guest) or RESUME_HOST, which is propagated > back out to userland as the return value of ioctl(KVM_RUN). So, anything > kvmtool sees is either <0 for error or RESUME_HOST, i.e. 2. > > Alex, do you think the PPC KVM code should be forced to 0 on success, or is > there any value to the expanded the return codes (and updating api.txt) for > varying kinds of positive success? I don't think it's worth the potential ABI breakage to change the current behavior :). Even if we did change it, you would still have to touch kvm tool to work with older kernels. Alex > -- 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
