[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6467b9e49103c4d7afa1f961294552c1be336f13.camel@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2023 15:43:35 +0200
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: Paul Durrant <paul@....org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@...zon.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] KVM: xen: allow shared_info to be mapped by fixed
HVA
On Thu, 2023-09-14 at 08:49 +0000, Paul Durrant wrote:
> @@ -1786,9 +1787,10 @@ struct kvm_xen_hvm_attr {
> __u8 long_mode;
> __u8 vector;
> __u8 runstate_update_flag;
> - struct {
> + union {
> __u64 gfn;
> #define KVM_XEN_INVALID_GFN ((__u64)-1)
> + __u64 hva;
> } shared_info;
> struct {
> __u32 send_port;
Hm, do we consider that to be an acceptable ABI change? I suppose
arguably it's compatible with any existing source or binary code, and
that's the criterion that really matters?
Worth drawing attention to it in case anyone strongly objects.
Reviewed-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>
As discussed though, I'd be inclined not to *advertise* the new cap
yet; roll the auto-vcpu-info in with it and only set it in the final
patch where you add the test cases.
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5965 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists