[PATCH v3 1/4] ARM: KVM: Implement kvm_vcpu_preferred_target() function
From: Marc Zyngier <hidden>
Date: 2013-09-19 14:27:54
On 19/09/13 14:11, Anup Patel wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
This patch implements kvm_vcpu_preferred_target() function for KVM ARM which will help us implement KVM_ARM_PREFERRED_TARGET ioctl for user space. Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <redacted> Signed-off-by: Pranavkumar Sawargaonkar <redacted> --- arch/arm/kvm/guest.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+)diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/guest.c b/arch/arm/kvm/guest.c index 152d036..b407e6c 100644 --- a/arch/arm/kvm/guest.c +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/guest.c@@ -222,6 +222,26 @@ int kvm_vcpu_set_target(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, return kvm_reset_vcpu(vcpu); } +int kvm_vcpu_preferred_target(struct kvm_vcpu_init *init) +{ + int target = kvm_target_cpu(); + + if (target < 0) + return -ENODEV; + + memset(init, 0, sizeof(*init)); + + /* + * For now, we return all optional features are available + * for preferred target. In future, we might have features + * available based on underlying host. + */ + init->target = (__u32)target; + init->features[0] |= (1 << KVM_ARM_VCPU_POWER_OFF);
I'm in two minds about this feature reporting. I see they serve a purpose, but they also duplicate capabilities, which is the standard way to advertise what KVM can do. It means we end up having to sync two reporting mechanism, and I feel this is in general a bad idea. Furthermore, KVM_ARM_VCPU_POWER_OFF is hardly a feature of the HW, but rather a firmware emulation thing. Peter, Christoffer: Thoughts? M.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ return 0; +} + int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_get_fpu(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_fpu *fpu) { return -EINVAL;diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h index f318c43..b609db3 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h@@ -156,6 +156,7 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_stat { struct kvm_vcpu_init; int kvm_vcpu_set_target(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct kvm_vcpu_init *init); +int kvm_vcpu_preferred_target(struct kvm_vcpu_init *init); unsigned long kvm_arm_num_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu); int kvm_arm_copy_reg_indices(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 __user *indices); struct kvm_one_reg;
-- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...