|
From: | Halil Pasic |
Subject: | Re: [qemu-s390x] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 5/7] s390x/vfio: ap: Introduce VFIO AP device |
Date: | Fri, 16 Mar 2018 16:36:27 +0100 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 |
On 03/16/2018 04:29 PM, Tony Krowiak wrote: >>> However it is a general switch for the VM. >>> It looks strange to have this inside the realize callback >>> >> I kind of semi agree. >> >> The previous solution (having this transparent for QEMU) had >> benefits. Why did we move away from that again? > This was done to address the multitude of objections and opinions related to > how/when/where ECA_APIE is set. Pierre summed it up best with his comment "we > need to separate the CPU feature defining 'if AP instructions are available' > from the QEMU property defining 'How we provide the instructions'. I agree and > this is how I chose to implement that. It's even more separated if the one is controlled via a userspace facing interface (cpu models) and the other is controlled via an in-kernel interface (e.g. like done previously in vfio open AFAIR). I can not accept this answer. I don't recall the multitude and I think I've showed that the 'need to separate' argument does not work. Regards, Halil
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |