On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 10:23:29PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 02:23:03PM -0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > > This is a pretty mechanical change. To make code look > > closer to upstream qemu, I'm renaming kvm_context_t to > > KVMState. Mid term goal here is to start sharing code > > whereas possible. > > > > Avi, please apply, or I'll send you a video of myself > > dancing naked. > > > You can start recording it since I doubt this patch will apply cleanly > to today's master (other mechanical change was applied). Regardless, I > think trying to use bits of qemu kvm is dangerous. It has similar function > with same names, but with different assumptions about conditional they > can be executed in (look at commit a5ddb119). I actually prefer to be > different enough to not call upstream qemu function by mistake.
I did it against today's master. If new patches came in, is just a matter of regenerating this, since it is, as I said, mechanical. Also, as we don't compile in upstream functions yet (kvm-all.c and kvm.c are not included in the final object), there is no such risk. Of course, I am aiming towards it, but the first step will be to change the name of conflicting functions until we can pick qemu's implementation, in which case the former will just go away. If we are serious about merging qemu-kvm into qemu, I don't see a way out of it. We should start changing things this way to accomodate it. Different enough won't do. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
