Anthony Liguori wrote: > > So the new ioctl() has the extra data and the old ioctl() is just a > compat interface which calls the new ioctl with a NULL extra data. I > think this is the better approach if you're going this route. > > However, I still don't think that supporting asymmetric cores is > really useful at the moment and that introducing a per-vm arch ioctl > would be the best approach.
Note that kvm/x86 supports slightly asymmetric cores, in that the cpuid results can be different for different vcpus. I can't judge how important this feature is for ppc, though. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
