qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] s390/kvm: Support for get/set of extende


From: Cornelia Huck
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] s390/kvm: Support for get/set of extended TOD-Clock for guest
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 15:29:01 +0200

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 13:44:31 +0200
Christian Borntraeger <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 10/04/2017 01:42 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > On 04.10.2017 12:57, Christian Borntraeger wrote:  
> >> From: "Collin L. Walling" <address@hidden>
> >>
> >> Provides an interface for getting and setting the guest's extended
> >> TOD-Clock via a single ioctl to kvm. If the ioctl fails because it
> >> is not support by kvm, then we fall back to the old style of
> >> retrieving the clock via two ioctls.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Collin L. Walling <address@hidden>
> >> Reviewed-by: Eric Farman <address@hidden>
> >> Reviewed-by: Claudio Imbrenda <address@hidden>
> >> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <address@hidden>
> >> [split failure change from epoch index change]
> >> ---
> >>  target/s390x/cpu.c       | 26 +++++++++++++++++++-------
> >>  target/s390x/kvm-stub.c  | 10 ++++++++++
> >>  target/s390x/kvm.c       | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >>  target/s390x/kvm_s390x.h |  2 ++
> >>  4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

> >> diff --git a/target/s390x/kvm.c b/target/s390x/kvm.c
> >> index ebb75ca..4c944a5 100644
> >> --- a/target/s390x/kvm.c
> >> +++ b/target/s390x/kvm.c
> >> @@ -643,10 +643,27 @@ int kvm_s390_get_clock(uint8_t *tod_high, uint64_t 
> >> *tod_low)
> >>      return kvm_vm_ioctl(kvm_state, KVM_GET_DEVICE_ATTR, &attr);
> >>  }
> >>  
> >> +int kvm_s390_get_clock_ext(uint8_t *tod_high, uint64_t *tod_low)
> >> +{
> >> +    int r;
> >> +    struct kvm_s390_vm_tod_clock gtod;
> >> +  
> > 
> > So you've got a blank line here...  
> 
> Yes, seems that I have forgotten this one. 
> I will let Conny decide if I should resend or if she can fixup.

No worries, I can make this consistent on applying.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]