[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <96238455-73b6-bead-0fdb-55ca68e5bf0b@quicinc.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2022 17:11:21 -0700
From: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@...cinc.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: Bjorn Andersson <quic_bjorande@...cinc.com>,
Murali Nalajala <quic_mnalajal@...cinc.com>,
Trilok Soni <quic_tsoni@...cinc.com>,
"Srivatsa Vaddagiri" <quic_svaddagi@...cinc.com>,
Carl van Schaik <quic_cvanscha@...cinc.com>,
Prakruthi Deepak Heragu <quic_pheragu@...cinc.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
"Will Deacon" <will@...nel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
Amol Maheshwari <amahesh@....qualcomm.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 13/21] gunyah: vm_mgr: Introduce basic VM Manager
On 11/2/2022 5:24 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 11:45:12AM -0700, Elliot Berman wrote:
>> +Michael
>>
>> On 11/1/2022 10:14 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 11:58:38AM -0700, Elliot Berman wrote:
>>>> +#define GH_CREATE_VM _IO(GH_IOCTL_TYPE, 0x40) /* Returns a Gunyah VM fd */
>>>
>>> Why 0x40? Why not just use the same KVM ioctl numbers and names as you
>>> are doing the same thing as them, right?
>>
>> We've designed so that there are a few ioctls that will feel similar to KVM
>> ioctls since we know this design has been successful, but we don't intend to
>> support KVM ioctls 1:1. Gunyah has different semantics for many of the
>> name-identical ioctls. It seems odd to mix some re-used KVM ioctls with
>> novel Gunyah ioctls?
>
> Even if you don't support it 1:1, at least for the ones that are the
> same thing, pick the same numbers as that's a nicer thing to do, right?
>
Does same thing == interpretation of arguments is the same? For
instance, GH_CREATE_VM and KVM_CREATE_VM interpret the arguments
differently. Same for KVM_SET_USERSPACE_MEMORY. The high level
functionality should be similar for most all hypervisors since they will
all support creating a VM and probably sharing memory with that VM. The
arguments for that will necessarily look similar, but they will probably
be subtly different because the hypervisors support different features.
I don't think userspace that supports both KVM and Gunyah will benefit
much from re-using the same numbers since those re-used ioctl calls
still need to sit within the context of a Gunyah VM.
Thanks,
Elliot
Powered by blists - more mailing lists