Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:06:42 -0800 | From | Zachary Amsden <> | Subject | Re: [patch 10/21] Xen-paravirt: Name: dont export paravirt_ops structure, do individual functions |
| |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Wrap the paravirt_ops members we want to export in wrapper functions. > Since we binary-patch the critical ones, this doesn't make a speed > impact. > > I moved drm_follow_page into the core, to avoid having to wrap the > various pte ops. Unlining kernel_fpu_end and using that in the RAID6 > code would remove the need to export clts/read_cr0/write_cr0 too. > > Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org> > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xensource.com> > > =================================================================== > --- a/arch/i386/kernel/paravirt.c > +++ b/arch/i386/kernel/paravirt.c > @@ -596,6 +596,123 @@ static int __init print_banner(void) > return 0; > } > core_initcall(print_banner); > + > +unsigned long paravirt_save_flags(void) > +{ > + return paravirt_ops.save_fl(); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(paravirt_save_flags); > + > +void paravirt_restore_flags(unsigned long flags) > +{ > + paravirt_ops.restore_fl(flags); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(paravirt_restore_flags); > + > +void paravirt_irq_disable(void) > +{ > + paravirt_ops.irq_disable(); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(paravirt_irq_disable); > + > +void paravirt_irq_enable(void) > +{ > + paravirt_ops.irq_enable(); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(paravirt_irq_enable); >
This turned out really hideous looking to me. Can't we split the struct into GPL'd and non-GPL'd functions instead? We still have the same granularity, and none of this function call to an indirect function call nonsense.
Zach - 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/
| |