On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 06:42:18PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:

On 08/27/2013 05:56 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 05:49:26PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:

quoted

This is to reserve a capablity number for upcoming support
of VFIO-IOMMU DMA operations in real mode.

The last ioctl in the group which KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU is added to
is 0xac, the next two numbers are taken - 0xad for KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL and

0xac was also taken by KVM_SET_ONE_REG :(

quoted

0xae for KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT. So the KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU ioclt gets
0xaf.

Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <redacted>

---
Changes:
2013/08/15 v8:
* fixed comment again

2013/08/15:
* fixed mistype in comments
* fixed commit message which says what uses ioctls 0xad and 0xae

2013/07/16:
* changed the number

2013/07/11:
* changed order in a file, added comment about a gap in ioctl number
---
 include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
index 99c2533..bd94127 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h

@@ -668,6 +668,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_smmu_info {
 #define KVM_CAP_IRQ_XICS 92
 #define KVM_CAP_ARM_EL1_32BIT 93
 #define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_MULTITCE 94
+#define KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU 95
 
 #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING
 

@@ -933,6 +934,11 @@ struct kvm_s390_ucas_mapping {
 #define KVM_ARM_SET_DEVICE_ADDR	  _IOW(KVMIO,  0xab, struct kvm_arm_device_addr)
 /* Available with KVM_CAP_PPC_RTAS */
 #define KVM_PPC_RTAS_DEFINE_TOKEN _IOW(KVMIO,  0xac, struct kvm_rtas_token_args)
+/* 0xad is taken by KVM_KVMCLOCK_CTRL */
+/* 0xae is taken by KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT */
+/* Available with KVM_CAP_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU */
+#define KVM_CREATE_SPAPR_TCE_IOMMU _IOW(KVMIO,  0xaf, \
+					struct kvm_create_spapr_tce_iommu)
 

Why not use KVM_CREATE_DEVICE API for that?

Because when I came up with my ioctl first time, it was not in upstream and
since then nobody pointed me to this new ioctl :)

Sorry about that :(. The ioctl exists for a while now, but with v8 patch I
imaging your patch series predates it.

So my stuff is not going to upstream again. Heh. Ok. I'll implement it.

Thanks! Should I keep KVM_CAP_SPAPR_MULTITCE capability patch or can I
drop it for now?

--
			Gleb.