Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> writes: > Am 20.06.2013 um 17:42 schrieb Anthony Liguori <aligu...@us.ibm.com>: > >> Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> writes: >> >>> Am 19.06.2013 22:40, schrieb Anthony Liguori: >>>> Signed-off-by: Anthony Liguori <aligu...@us.ibm.com> >>>> --- >>>> qtest.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> tests/libqtest.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ >>>> tests/libqtest.h | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 3 files changed, 93 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/qtest.c b/qtest.c >>>> index 07a9612..f8c8f44 100644 >>>> --- a/qtest.c >>>> +++ b/qtest.c >>>> @@ -19,6 +19,9 @@ >>>> #include "hw/irq.h" >>>> #include "sysemu/sysemu.h" >>>> #include "sysemu/cpus.h" >>>> +#ifdef TARGET_PPC64 >>>> +#include "hw/ppc/spapr.h" >>>> +#endif >>>> >>>> #define MAX_IRQ 256 >>>> >>>> @@ -141,6 +144,13 @@ static bool qtest_opened; >>>> * where NUM is an IRQ number. For the PC, interrupts can be intercepted >>>> * simply with "irq_intercept_in ioapic" (note that IRQ0 comes out with >>>> * NUM=0 even though it is remapped to GSI 2). >>>> + * >>>> + * Platform specific (sPAPR): >>>> + * >>>> + * > papr_hypercall NR ARG0 ARG1 ... ARG8 >>> >>> The functions are called spapr_hcall*() but the protocol uses >>> papr_hypercall? >> >> The discrepancy is inherited in the KVM vs. QEMU interfaces. It's >> called papr_hypercall in the KVM interface vs. spapr in QEMU. >> >> I honestly don't know what the distinction between spapr and papr is. > > PAPR is what PAPR calls itself. However, there is also an ePAPR for > BookE, so in order to distinguish the 2 more easily, we named the > server version spapr wherever we remembered to.
So does it make sense to have papr_hypercall()? Do hypercalls exist with the virtualization extensions on BookE? Regards, Anthony Liguori > > > Alex
