linux-kernel - Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 11/17] target-s390x: Add KVM VM attribute interface for S390 CPU models

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <553E1506.5080206@de.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 27 Apr 2015 12:52:54 +0200
From:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To:	Michael Mueller <mimu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	qemu-devel@...gnu.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@...hat.com>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>, Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
	Daniel Hansel <daniel.hansel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Jason J. Herne" <jjherne@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
	Andreas Faerber <afaerber@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 11/17] target-s390x: Add KVM VM attribute
 interface for S390 CPU models

Am 27.04.2015 um 11:43 schrieb Michael Mueller:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:15:47 +0200
> Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com> wrote:
> 
>> Am 13.04.2015 um 15:56 schrieb Michael Mueller:
>> [...]
>>> +static int cpu_model_get(KVMState *s, uint64_t attr, uint64_t addr)
>>> +{
>>> +    int rc = -ENOSYS;
>>> +    struct kvm_device_attr dev_attr = {
>>> +        .group = KVM_S390_VM_CPU_MODEL,
>>> +        .attr = attr,
>>> +        .addr = addr,
>>
>> Would it make sense to do the cast here....
> 
> cpu_model_get/set() is used to handle both attributes,
> KVM_S390_VM_CPU_MACHINE and KVM_S390_VM_CPU_PROCESSOR.
> Both require a different type in the signature, (S390ProcessorProps*)
> and (S390MachineProps*). Adding both as parameters seems to be odd
> and would require additionally logic in the function.
> Thus I think doing the cast outside is just the right thing to do.

So what about a void pointer then as parameter?
I prefer a pointer for qemu process memory over uint64_t as part of the 
function interface. This makes it somewhat clearer that this is an
address within QEMU. Both ways will certainly work, though.

Conny, I guess you will pick up the patches. Any preference?

Christian

--
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/