On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 13:12 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 01/24/2011 08:06 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
> > KVM, which stands for KVM Virtual Memory (I wanted to call it KVM Virtual Mojito),
> > is a piece of shared memory that is visible to both the hypervisor and the guest
> > kernel - but not the guest userspace.
> > The basic idea is that the guest can tell the hypervisor about a specific
> > piece of memory, and what it expects to find in there. This is a generic
> > abstraction, that goes to userspace (qemu) if KVM (the hypervisor) can't
> > handle a specific request, thus giving us flexibility in some features
> > in the future.
> > KVM (The hypervisor) can change the contents of this piece of memory at
> > will. This works well with paravirtual information, and hopefully
> > normal guest memory - like last update time for the watchdog, for
> > instance.
> > This patch contains the header part of the userspace communication implementation.
> > Userspace can query the presence/absence of this feature in the normal way.
> > It also tells the hypervisor that it is capable of handling - in whatever
> > way it chooses, registrations that the hypervisor does not know how to.
> > In x86, only user so far, this mechanism is implemented as generic userspace
> > msr exit, that could theorectically be used to implement msr-handling in
> > userspace.
> > I am keeping the headers separate to facilitate backports to people
> > who wants to backport the kernel part but not the hypervisor, or the other way around.
> Again the protocol is not specified. How about starting from
> Documentation/kvm/api.txt so we don't have to guess?
I will do that in the next version, if the idea is not shoot up