On 20.06.2013, at 20:58, Anthony Liguori wrote: > 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?
papr_hypercall() really means spapr_hypercall() :). I don't think we should mangle ePAPR and sPAPR together. Alex
