Hollis Blanchard wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 11:04 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> The nicer one:
>>>>
>>>> struct kvm {
>>>> struct kvm_arch arch;
>>>> // common fields
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I prefer this one, seems it is more direct and readable. Same thinking
>>> about kvm_vcpu structure:)
>>>
>>>
>> I agree, kvm_vcpu should use the same method.
>>
>
> And we will convert vcpu_vmx/vcpu_svm as well?
>
>
These cannot use the same method, since we need to support both vmx and
svm in the same binary. The arch specific members aren't the same size,
nor do the symbols they use have the same visibility.
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to
panic.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
