On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 15:33 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> The suggestion I liked best (Anthony's) was
>
> struct vmx_vcpu {
> struct kvm_vcpu vcpu;
> void *vmcs;
> // other vmx-specific data
> };
>
> to move from a kvm_vcpu to a vmx_vcpu, you use container_of() (inside
> your vmx() inline). Look ma, no pointers!
Hmm..well, you still have pointers. The advantage is that they are
implicitly maintained, but now you have to do pointer arithmetic to
compute it. :( I personally would probably rather have the explicit
management code than the run-time overhead....
But alas, the rest of Linux is moving in this direction as well, so I
think this recommendation makes a lot of sense. Note that it
complicates the initialization code a little bit, but its not a big
deal. I will incorporate this into the next spin.
>
>
> Too many people are touching this area without coordinating (and one
> patch will invalidate all the rest).
Ah, I wasn't aware of this. Who else is working on it?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
