On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:52:54AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote: > On 01/22/2013 11:04:59 PM, David Gibson wrote: > >diff --git a/target-ppc/kvm.c b/target-ppc/kvm.c > >index 2f4f068..e84b993 100644 > >--- a/target-ppc/kvm.c > >+++ b/target-ppc/kvm.c > >@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ static int cap_booke_sregs; > > static int cap_ppc_smt; > > static int cap_ppc_rma; > > static int cap_spapr_tce; > >-static int cap_hior; > >+static int cap_one_reg; > > > > /* XXX We have a race condition where we actually have a level > >triggered > > * interrupt, but the infrastructure can't expose that yet, > >so the guest > >@@ -89,7 +89,11 @@ int kvm_arch_init(KVMState *s) > > cap_ppc_smt = kvm_check_extension(s, KVM_CAP_PPC_SMT); > > cap_ppc_rma = kvm_check_extension(s, KVM_CAP_PPC_RMA); > > cap_spapr_tce = kvm_check_extension(s, KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE); > >- cap_hior = kvm_check_extension(s, KVM_CAP_PPC_HIOR); > >+ /* This capability is misnamed - it was introduced with the > >+ * KVM_SET_ONE_REG ioctl(), which at the time only supported the > >+ * HIOR. We don't want a different capability for every register > >+ * the interface can support though. */ > >+ cap_one_reg = kvm_check_extension(s, KVM_CAP_PPC_HIOR); > > So what happens when we want to use onereg for booke, which doesn't > have KVM_CAP_PPC_HIOR? Into what variable would we put a check for > KVM_CAP_ONE_REG?
Drat, good point. There is no KVM_CAP_ONE_REG, that's the problem. I
guess I'll have to leave cap_hior as it is, and just not have a
capability check.
> IMHO this should stay as cap_hior and merge the above comment with
> the comment where you check cap_hior, regarding not all registers
> necessarily being supported.
I'm not sure quite what you mean by this.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
