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
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
