lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Dec]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] Proposed new directory layout for kvm and virtualization
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 06:15:40PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> >On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 11:47:39AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >
> >>KVM is due to receive support for multiple architectures (ppc, ia64, and
> >>s390, in addition to the existing x86), hopefully in time for the 2.6.25
> >>merge window. It is awkward to place the new arch support in
> >>drivers/kvm/, so I'd like to propose the following new layout:
> >>
> >> virt/ top-level directory for hypervisors
> >> virt/kvm/ kvm common code
> >> virt/lguest/ the other hypervisor
> >> arch/*/kvm/ arch dependent kvm code
> >>
> >
> >The arch/*/dir shall use same dir-name as used
> >in top-level directory.
> >
>
> Well, it isn't like that now (arch/x86/oprofile, etc.)
oprofile is now the best leader to follow in this respect.
Just look at the utterly crap in their makefiles.

> >So use arch/*/virt/kvm/ if kvm really requires
> >a subdirectory of it own. Preferably not.
> >A handful of files named kvm* does not warrant their own
> >subdirectory IMO.
> >
> >
>
> We'll have 5-6 x86 specific files.
>
> Where do you suggest we place them?
/arch/x86/virt/

Seems logical and fit the way we handle mm/ versus arch/*/mm,
kernel/ arch/*/kernel etc.

Are there any dependencies between the arch and non-arch files
such as they are combined in a single module?

Sam


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-12-11 18:39    [W:0.059 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site