Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] generic hypercall support

[Avi Kivity]

Gregory Haskins wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>   
> > Gregory Haskins wrote:
> >     
> > > (Applies to Linus' tree, b4348f32dae3cb6eb4bc21c7ed8f76c0b11e9d6a)
> > >
> > > Please see patch 1/3 for a description.  This has been tested with a KVM
> > > guest on x86_64 and appears to work properly.  Comments, please.
> > >   
> > >       
> > What about the hypercalls in include/asm/kvm_para.h?
> >
> > In general, hypercalls cannot be generic since each hypervisor
> > implements its own ABI.
> >     
> Please see the prologue to 1/3.  Its all described there, including a
> use case which I think answers your questions.  If there is still
> ambiguity, let me know.
>
>   

Yeah, sorry.

> >   The abstraction needs to be at a higher level (pv_ops is such a level).
> >     
> Yep, agreed.  Thats exactly what this series is doing, actually.
>   

No, it doesn't.  It makes "making hypercalls" a pv_op, but hypervisors 
don't implement the same ABI.

pv_ops all _use_ hypercalls to implement higher level operations, like 
set_pte (probably the only place set_pte can be considered a high level 
operation).

In this case, the higher level event could be 
hypervisor_dynamic_event(number); each pv_ops implementation would use 
its own hypercalls to implement that.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/