Message-ID: <46EB02BA.6030909@goop.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:52:58 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070719)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
CC: kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>
Subject: Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH] Refactor hypercall infrastructure
References: <11897991353793-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> <46EAF4C6.8090903@goop.org> <46EAF6FC.80207@codemonkey.ws> <46EAFBA0.4020503@goop.org> <46EB0136.6080105@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <46EB0136.6080105@codemonkey.ws>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 825
Lines: 17

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Yeah, see, the initial goal was to make it possible to use the KVM
> paravirtualizations on other hypervisors.  However, I don't think this
> is really going to be possible in general so maybe it's better to just
> use leaf 0.  I'll let others chime in before sending a new patch.

Hm.  Obviously you can just define a signature for "kvm-compatible
hypercall interface" and make it common that way, but it gets tricky if
the hypervisor supports multiple hypercall interfaces, including the kvm
one.  Start the kvm leaves at 0x40001000 or something?

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