On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 11:56:39 +0200
"Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 01:09:45PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > Here's the second attempt at implementing ioeventfd for s390.
>
> The patchset looks fine overall.
> Minor comments and questions below.
Cool, thanks for reviewing
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 01:09:45PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> Here's the second attempt at implementing ioeventfd for s390.
The patchset looks fine overall.
Minor comments and questions below.
>
> Rather than the architecture-specific functions used in v1, we
> now try to integrate with the k
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 01:09:45PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> Here's the second attempt at implementing ioeventfd for s390.
>
> Rather than the architecture-specific functions used in v1, we
> now try to integrate with the kvm_io_device infrastructure.
> Calls to diagnose 500 subcode 3 are now
Here's the second attempt at implementing ioeventfd for s390.
Rather than the architecture-specific functions used in v1, we
now try to integrate with the kvm_io_device infrastructure.
Calls to diagnose 500 subcode 3 are now mapped to _write.
These devices are created on a new KVM_CSS_BUS when usi
