On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 21:09:05 +0200 Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote:
> On 04/17/2015 09:52 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > From: Xu Wang <gesa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > Intercept the diag288 requests from kvm guests, and hand the > > requested command to the diag288 watchdog device for further > > handling. > > > > Signed-off-by: Xu Wang <gesa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com> > > We're getting a lot of random devices allocating diag intercepts. Can't > we make this an actual interface, similar to the hypercall registration > on sPAPR? I've looked at the sPAPR hcall code, and it seems to basically provide a table with a nice registration interface (we already use something similar for the diagnose 500 virtio subcodes, btw.) While we could move our basic diagnose handling over to a table-like approach and registering new diagnoses, I think this is orthogonal to introducing a diag288 watchdog device: It just makes sense to model the watchdog as a device that just happens to be poked via a diagnose. If we introduce any further diagnoses to manipulate timing etc., I agree we don't want to add a device for each of these.
