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.
Doesn't apply.
Also, it's a little fishy. We now have two KVMState types, but they're
Avi Kivity wrote:
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.
Doesn't apply.
Also, it's a little fishy. We now have two
Jan Kiszka wrote:
What we could do is embed a kvm_context_t variable in the real KVMState,
and start using that. Then, we could, function by function, use the
upstream KVMState functionality and remove the corresponding
kvm_context_t functionality.
That would be great and was also what I
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
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 04:33:19PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
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
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 11:00:46PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 04:33:19PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
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
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 11:09:52PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 05:10:51PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 11:00:46PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 04:33:19PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 10:23:29PM
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 05:18:06PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
this first phase has nothing to do with functionality. To begin with,
KVMState is qemu style, kvm_context_t is not, like it or not (I don't).
I am not against this mechanical change at all, don't get me wrong. I
don't
