lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC REPOST 1/2] paravirt: refactor struct paravirt_ops into smaller pv_*_ops
Date
On Wednesday 10 October 2007 04:24:24 Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> [ I think this is a straight repost this patch, which addresses all the
> previous comments. I'd like to submit this for .24 as the basis for a
> unified paravirt_ops. Any objections? ]

Thanks Jeremy, I've actually taken time to finally review this in detail (I'm
assuming you'll refactor as necessary after the x86 arch merger).

> + OFFSET(PARAVIRT_enabled, pv_info, paravirt_enabled);

I think this gives the right answer for the wrong reasons?

> +struct paravirt_ops paravirt_ops;
> +

Do you actually need to define this? See below...

> +DEF_NATIVE(, ud2a, "ud2a");

Hmm, that's ugly. It was ugly before, but it's uglier now. Maybe just
use "unsigned char ud2a[] = { 0x0f, 0x0b };" in paravirt_patch_default?

> }
>
> struct paravirt_ops paravirt_ops = {
...
> + .pv_info = {
> + .name = "bare hardware",
> + .paravirt_enabled = 0,
> + .kernel_rpl = 0,
> + .shared_kernel_pmd = 1, /* Only used when CONFIG_X86_PAE is set */
> + },

This is the bit I don't get. Why not just declare struct pv_info pvinfo, etc,
and use the declaration of struct paravirt_ops to get your unique
offset-based identifiers for patching?

Rest looks fine...

Thanks!
Rusty.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-10 09:55    [W:0.050 / U:0.256 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site