Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 3 Jun 2011 11:22:13 -0500 | From | Scott Wood <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 7/7] [v2] drivers/misc: introduce Freescale hypervisor management driver |
| |
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 17:28:43 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Thursday 02 June 2011, Scott Wood wrote: > > I wanted to have the hypervisor take an update dtb (we already have special > > meta-properties for things like deletion as part of the hv config > > mechanism). But others on the project wanted to keep it simple, and so > > get/set property it was. :-/ > > > > It's unlikely to change at this point without a real need. > > > > As for a filesystem interface, it's not a good match either. > > You can't iterate over anything to read out the full tree from the hv. > > kexec iterates over /proc/device-tree to create a dts blob.
That's irrelevant, because we're not talking about that device tree. We're talking about the device tree of another hypervisor guest.
> > You can't delete anything. > > rm, rmdir > > > You can't create empty nodes. > > mkdir
I know how to operate a filesystem. You can't do these operations *on another guest's device tree through the hv interface*.
> > There would still be other ioctls needed for starting/stopping the > > partition, etc. > > Right, although you could model them as a file interface as well. > KVMfs is one example doing that.
And what would be the benefit of this major restructuring and added complexity?
-Scott
| |