Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

Hi, On 11-08-17 21:34, Arnd Bergmann wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: On 11-08-17 18:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: On 11-08-17 18:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote: How about

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

Hi, On 11-08-17 21:34, Arnd Bergmann wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: On 11-08-17 18:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: On 11-08-17 18:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote: How about adding it to drivers/virt/ then? That as

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 11-08-17 18:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Hans de Goede >> wrote: >>> On 11-08-17 18:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> How about adding it to drivers/virt/ then? > > >

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 11-08-17 18:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Hans de Goede >> wrote: >>> On 11-08-17 18:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> How about adding it to drivers/virt/ then? > > > That as actually my first choice, but there

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

Hi, On 11-08-17 18:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: On 11-08-17 18:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote: Can you clarify which ioctl interface they agreed to? Would they only keep the one that the proposed driver implements today, or the

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

Hi, On 11-08-17 18:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: On 11-08-17 18:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote: Can you clarify which ioctl interface they agreed to? Would they only keep the one that the proposed driver implements today, or the one we end up with

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 11-08-17 18:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> Can you clarify which ioctl interface they agreed to? Would they >> only keep the one that the proposed driver implements today, >> or the one we end up with after a full

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 11-08-17 18:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> Can you clarify which ioctl interface they agreed to? Would they >> only keep the one that the proposed driver implements today, >> or the one we end up with after a full review? ;-) > > > Given

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

Hi, On 11-08-17 18:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: The vboxguest driver introduces a new userspace API + ABI in the form of ioctls on a character device. VirtualBox upstream not willing to commit to keeping this ABI stable

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

Hi, On 11-08-17 18:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote: On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: The vboxguest driver introduces a new userspace API + ABI in the form of ioctls on a character device. VirtualBox upstream not willing to commit to keeping this ABI stable was one of the things

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > The vboxguest driver introduces a new userspace API + ABI in the form > of ioctls on a character device. VirtualBox upstream not willing to > commit to keeping this ABI stable was one of the things which has > kept this

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > The vboxguest driver introduces a new userspace API + ABI in the form > of ioctls on a character device. VirtualBox upstream not willing to > commit to keeping this ABI stable was one of the things which has > kept this driver driver out of

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 03:23:22PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hello Greg, Arnd, Alexander, et al., > > Here is a first RFC version of my cleaned up version of the > VirtualBox vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers. > > This is an RFC because there are still some checkpatch and other small >

Re: [RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 03:23:22PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hello Greg, Arnd, Alexander, et al., > > Here is a first RFC version of my cleaned up version of the > VirtualBox vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers. > > This is an RFC because there are still some checkpatch and other small >

[RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

Hello Greg, Arnd, Alexander, et al., Here is a first RFC version of my cleaned up version of the VirtualBox vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers. This is an RFC because there are still some checkpatch and other small style issues which I need to fix. I'm posting this now because the majority of

[RFC 0/2] Add Virtual Box vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers to the mainline kernel

Hello Greg, Arnd, Alexander, et al., Here is a first RFC version of my cleaned up version of the VirtualBox vboxguest and vboxsf guest drivers. This is an RFC because there are still some checkpatch and other small style issues which I need to fix. I'm posting this now because the majority of