Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC v2 02/12] vfio: linux-headers update for vfio-ccw

[Cornelia Huck]

On Wed, 18 Jan 2017 10:51:17 +0800
Dong Jia Shi <address@hidden> wrote:

> * Alex Williamson <address@hidden> [2017-01-17 14:51:42 -0700]:
> 
> > On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 08:25:03 +0100
> > Dong Jia Shi <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 
> > > From: Xiao Feng Ren <address@hidden>
> > > 
> > > This is a placeholder for a linux-headers update.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Xiao Feng Ren <address@hidden>
> > > ---
> > >  include/standard-headers/asm-s390/vfio_ccw.h | 28 
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  linux-headers/linux/vfio.h                   | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> > >  2 files changed, 45 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644 include/standard-headers/asm-s390/vfio_ccw.h
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/include/standard-headers/asm-s390/vfio_ccw.h 
> > > b/include/standard-headers/asm-s390/vfio_ccw.h
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000..cddc09b
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/include/standard-headers/asm-s390/vfio_ccw.h
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
> > > +/*
> > > + * Interfaces for vfio-ccw
> > > + *
> > > + * Copyright IBM Corp. 2017
> > > + *
> > > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > > + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License (version 2 only)
> > > + * as published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > > + *
> > > + * Author(s): Dong Jia Shi <address@hidden>
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#ifndef _VFIO_CCW_H_
> > > +#define _VFIO_CCW_H_
> > > +
> > > +#include "standard-headers/linux/types.h"
> > > +
> > > +struct ccw_io_region {
> > > +#define ORB_AREA_SIZE 12
> > > + uint8_t  orb_area[ORB_AREA_SIZE];
> > > +#define SCSW_AREA_SIZE 12
> > > + uint8_t  scsw_area[SCSW_AREA_SIZE];
> > > +#define IRB_AREA_SIZE 96
> > > + uint8_t  irb_area[IRB_AREA_SIZE];
> > > + uint32_t ret_code;
> > > +} QEMU_PACKED;
> > > +
> > > +#endif
> > 
> > This is really part of the uapi for the vfio-ccw mdev device, isn't it?
> Yes, it is.
> 
> > Should it really be buried in asm-s390 in the kernel?
> > 
> We had an internal discussion on this question before, since we think
> this interface is strongly s390 dependent, we put it here. What do you
> suggest? Thanks,

As there are already architecture-specific definitions in the common
file, having everything in the same file is probably better. I'm
certainly not against moving it out from asm-s390.