On 14/10/2016 09:56, Greg Kurz wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2016 18:24:43 +0200
> Laurent Vivier <lviv...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Extract the realize part to cpu_exec_realize(), update all
>> calls to cpu_exec_init() to add cpu_exec_realize() to
>> have no functionnal change.
>> Put in cpu_exec_init() what initializes the CPU,
>> in cpu_exec_realize() what adds it to the environment.
>> Remove error parameter from cpu_exec_init() as it can't fail.
>> Rename cpu_exec_exit() with cpu_exec_unrealize():
>> cpu_exec_exit() is undoing what it has been done by cpu_exec_realize(), so
>> call it cpu_exec_unrealize().
>> CC: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <lviv...@redhat.com>
> Just one question: is there a reason that prevents cpu_exec_unrealize() to be
> declared in include/exec/exec-all.h next to cpu_exec_realize() ?
because qom/cpu.c doesn't include exec-all.h (and we can't as exec-all.h
is target specific and qom/cpu.c is common code).