[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1369784115.18630.27@snotra>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 18:35:15 -0500
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
To: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>
CC: David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>, <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: PPC: Add support for IOMMU in-kernel handling
On 05/28/2013 06:30:40 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> >> >>> @@ -939,6 +940,9 @@ struct kvm_s390_ucas_mapping {
> >> >>> #define KVM_GET_DEVICE_ATTR _IOW(KVMIO, 0xe2, struct
> >> >>> kvm_device_attr)
> >> >>> #define KVM_HAS_DEVICE_ATTR _IOW(KVMIO, 0xe3, struct
> >> >>> kvm_device_attr)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> +/* ioctl for SPAPR TCE IOMMU */
> >> >>> +#define KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU _IOW(KVMIO, 0xe4, struct
> >> >>> kvm_create_spapr_tce_iommu)
> >> >>
> >> >> Shouldn't this go under the vm ioctl section?
> >>
> >>
> >> The KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU ioctl (the version for emulated
> devices) is
> >> in this section so I decided to keep them together. Wrong?
> >
> > You decided to keep KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU together with
> > KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU?
>
> Yes.
Sigh. That's the same thing repeated. There's only one IOCTL.
Nothing is being "kept together".
-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