Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 29 May 2013 15:05:49 -0500 | From | Scott Wood <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: PPC: Add support for IOMMU in-kernel handling |
| |
On 05/28/2013 07:12:32 PM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > On 05/29/2013 09:35 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > > 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". > > Sorry, I meant this ioctl - KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE.
But you didn't put it in the same section as KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE. 0xe0 begins a different section.
-Scott
| |