On 6/26/07, Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Turner wrote:
> > From: Paul Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > This just separates vmx/svm specific fields off kvm_vcpu into
> > kvm_vmx_data and kvm_svm_data fields respectively. Ideally these
> > should be compiled out depending on target architecture, at least the
> > waste is organized now. I didn't notice any svm specific fields,
> > however I've included the empty struct for completeness, let me know
> > if I've missed anything and I'll refresh.
> >
>
> This is much needed; thanks.
>
> > p.s. let me know if pine mangles this email/the patch at all, I did a
> > test mail to myself and it seemed to come out ok :)
> >
>
> There are many spaces-instead-of-tabs violations.
>
> >
> > +
> > struct kvm_vcpu {
> > struct kvm *kvm;
> > union {
>
> This union holds vmx/svm specific members that can be moved into the new
> structures.
>
> > +
> > + union {
> > + struct kvm_vmx_data vmx;
> > + struct kvm_svm_data svm;
> > + };
> > };
> >
>
> If you make this
>
> + union {
> + struct kvm_vmx_data vmx[1];
> + struct kvm_svm_data svm[1];
> + };
>
> then we can later change it to a zero-sized array with variable-size
> allocation, with no additional code changes.
>
Why do we want to make it array? I suppose that we only have 1 struct
(either vmx or svm) for each vcpu, no?
Thanks,
Jun
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
