[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1349976536.6903.7@snotra>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 12:28:56 -0500
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
To: Timur Tabi <B04825@...escale.com>
CC: Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the kvm-ppc tree with the
powerpc-merge tree
On 10/11/2012 12:24:59 PM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> Scott Wood wrote:
> >> > My concern is that when I think of a user-space header file, I
> think
> >> > of a
> >> > user-space application that calls ioctls. I know that KVM guest
> >> > kernels
> >> > run as user-space processes, but that does not seem like a
> reason to
> >> > combine all of the header files that the KVM guest kernel needs
> with
> >> > "real" user-space header files.
>
> > So where should guest headers go?
>
> I admit that I don't have any answers, especially since this whole
> thing
> is new to me. Like I said, I don't know much about KVM internals, so
> I
> just don't understand why KVM guests need to have access to these
> kernel
> header files as if they're user header files. The guests are still
> Linux
> kernels (or other OSes that think they're running as privileged code).
For hypercalls and other paravirt. That's the point -- they're not
kernel headers. They're guest API headers.
-scott
--
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