[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51DEAF60.2000902@ozlabs.ru>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 23:13:04 +1000
From: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
CC: Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] KVM: PPC: Add support for multiple-TCE hcalls
On 07/11/2013 10:58 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-07-11 at 14:51 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> I don't like bloat usually. But Alexey even had an #ifdef DEBUG in
>> there to selectively disable in-kernel handling of multi-TCE. Not
>> calling ENABLE_CAP would give him exactly that without ugly #ifdefs in
>> the kernel.
>
> I don't see much point in disabling it... but ok, if that's a valuable
> feature, then shoot some VM level ENABLE_CAP (please don't iterate all
> VCPUs, that's gross).
No use for me whatsoever as I only want to disable real more handlers and
keep virtual mode handlers enabled (sometime, for debug only) and this
capability is not about that - I can easily just not enable it in QEMU with
the exactly the same effect.
So please, fellas, decide whether I should iterate vcpu's or add ENABLE_CAP
per KVM. Thanks.
--
Alexey
--
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