On 12/08/2011 11:53 AM, Sasha Levin wrote: > On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 11:45 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 12/08/2011 11:25 AM, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > On Thu, 2011-12-08 at 10:12 +0100, Carsten Otte wrote: > > > > plain text document attachment (enable-ucontrol.patch) > > > > This patch introduces a new config option for user controlled kernel > > > > virtual machines. It introduces an optional parameter to > > > > KVM_CREATE_VM in order to create a user controlled virtual machine. > > > > The parameter is passed to kvm_arch_init_vm for all architectures. > > > > Valid values for the new parameter are KVM_VM_REGULAR (defined to 0 > > > > for backward compatibility to old KVM_CREATE_VM) and > > > > KVM_VM_S390_UCONTROL for s390 only. > > > > > > Why is it s390 specific? why isn't it KVM_VM_UCONTROL which is currently > > > only implemented on s390? > > > > It's not possible (or at least very difficult) to implement ucontrol on > > x86. For example, to update VMCSs you need privileged instructions. It > > might be doable on svm, but there's no point, really. > > Might not work for x86, but maybe on arm? ppc? or some other random arch > that will be added in the future? > > No point in limiting it to s390 from day one. Agree. > It also makes code a bit cleaner (kvm_main.c shouldn't have arch names > in the code). That doesn't bother me. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- 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
