Carsten Otte wrote: > Zhang, Xiantao wrote: >> User-allocation should be what we are heading. But considering >> compatibility with old user-space support, I think kernel-allocation >> approach should exist for a long time. > That's right. This is why I would prefer to have the corresponding > code out of kvm_main.c: it may exist for a long time for x86. > >> I think we don't need to consider >> this case now. Once the kernel-allocation approach is abandoned in >> future, as you say, we can move them all into x86. > I'd rather prefer to move it upfront. Otherwise, I'd have to consider > that case for s390 as long as it remains in common. At least I'd have > to make sure it does'nt get used on s390 using an if() or #ifdef.
I agree, other archs shouldn't have to suffer. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
