[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 08/13] x86/PMU: Interface for setting PMU mode and flags
>>> On 20.09.13 at 11:42, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > --- a/xen/include/public/xen.h > +++ b/xen/include/public/xen.h > @@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xen_ulong_t); > #define __HYPERVISOR_kexec_op 37 > #define __HYPERVISOR_tmem_op 38 > #define __HYPERVISOR_xc_reserved_op 39 /* reserved for XenClient */ > +#define __HYPERVISOR_xenpmu_op 40 > > /* Architecture-specific hypercall definitions. */ > #define __HYPERVISOR_arch_0 48 I wonder whether you wouldn't better use an arch-specific hypercall number here - there's really very little that's generic in what I have seen so far. > +/* Parameters structure for HYPERVISOR_xenpmu_op call */ > +struct xenpmu_params { > + /* IN/OUT parameters */ > + union { > + struct version { > + uint8_t maj; > + uint8_t min; > + } version; > + uint64_t pad; > + }; > + union { > + uint64_t val; > + void *valp; Without there also being a handle here I can't see how you could make use of the pointer. > + }; > + > + /* IN parameters */ > + uint64_t vcpu; Do you really want a 64-bit quantity here? > @@ -139,6 +140,9 @@ do_tmem_op( > extern long > do_xenoprof_op(int op, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg); > > +extern long > +do_xenpmu_op(int op, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg); This seems wrong - the interface above makes it so that you would only ever pass this a struct xenpmu_params, so the handle should be of that kind from the beginning. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |