Avi Kivity wrote:
For the present discussion, I agree, but in general we should be
prepared to accept some no-op callouts.
Oh sure, I don't mind those. We'll have plenty of them, where other
architectures will need to take action and s390 won't. It's just that
in the current location, the
Carsten Otte wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
For the present discussion, I agree, but in general we should be
prepared to accept some no-op callouts.
Oh sure, I don't mind those. We'll have plenty of them, where other
architectures will need to take action and s390 won't. It's just that
Carsten Otte wrote:
Hollis Blanchard wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 14:49 +0100, Carsten Otte wrote:
Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_free(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_decache(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int
Hollis Blanchard wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 14:49 +0100, Carsten Otte wrote:
Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_free(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_decache(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int cpu);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_put(struct
Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_free(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_decache(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int cpu);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
+struct kvm_vcpu *kvm_arch_vcpu_create(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 14:49 +0100, Carsten Otte wrote:
Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_free(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_decache(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int cpu);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 15:21 +0800, Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
@@ -890,7 +890,7 @@ static int kvm_vm_ioctl_create_vcpu(struct kvm
*kvm,
int n)
if (!valid_vcpu(n))
return -EINVAL;
- vcpu = kvm_x86_ops-vcpu_create(kvm, n);
+ vcpu = kvm_arch_vcpu_create(kvm,
From cba4340cef2217343c540ca5de9b67cc8826b63f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Zhang Xiantao [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 13:07:23 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Using kvm_arch prefix to define functions, and replace
kvm_x86_ops callback.
Signed-off-by: Zhang Xiantao [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
