Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210207154256.52850-1-jing2.liu@linux.intel.com> <20210207154256.52850-5-jing2.liu@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210207154256.52850-5-jing2.liu@linux.intel.com>
From:   Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 24 May 2021 15:06:17 -0700
Message-ID: <CALMp9eT8SoD0X=RZNv+o4LJLZZioTaPPXBnT199AGJKAwJ=W7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 4/7] kvm: x86: Add new ioctls for XSAVE extension
To:     Jing Liu <jing2.liu@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, jing2.liu@intel.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Feb 6, 2021 at 11:00 PM Jing Liu <jing2.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> The static xstate buffer kvm_xsave contains the extended register
> states, but it is not enough for dynamic features with large state.
>
> Introduce a new capability called KVM_CAP_X86_XSAVE_EXTENSION to
> detect if hardware has XSAVE extension (XFD). Meanwhile, add two
> new ioctl interfaces to get/set the whole xstate using struct
> kvm_xsave_extension buffer containing both static and dynamic
> xfeatures. Reuse fill_xsave and load_xsave for both cases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jing Liu <jing2.liu@linux.intel.com>
> ---

> +#define KVM_GET_XSAVE_EXTENSION   _IOW(KVMIO,  0xa4, struct kvm_xsave_extension)
> +#define KVM_SET_XSAVE_EXTENSION   _IOW(KVMIO,  0xa5, struct kvm_xsave_extension)
Isn't the convention to call these KVM_GET_XSAVE2 and KVM_SET_XSAVE2?

Do you have any documentation to add to Documentation/virt/kvm/api.rst?