[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1111072204370.3082@tux.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 22:09:34 +0200 (EET)
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Vince Weaver <vince@...ter.net>,
Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org list" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
qemu-devel Developers <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@...il.com>,
Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] KVM: Add wrapper script around QEMU to test
kernels
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>> The ABI design allows for that kind of flexible extensibility, and
>> it's one of its major advantages.
>>
>> What we *cannot* protect against is you relying on obscure details of
>> the ABI [...]
>
> Is there some documentation that clearly spells out which parts of the
> perf syscall userspace ABI are "obscure" and thus presumably
> changeable?
That's actually something the KVM and virtio folks have done a great job
with IMHO. Both ABIs are documented pretty extensively and the specs are
kept up to date.
I guess for perf ABI, "perf test" is the closest thing to a specification
so if your application is using something that's not covered by it, you
might be in trouble.
Pekka
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists