Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Paravirt: fix export of paravirt-ops to binary modules

[Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>]

On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 02:49 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Monday 23 April 2007 02:24:05 Rusty Russell wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 01:49 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > Less exports good.  Consistency with all config options isn't a hard
> > > > requirement: I'd be tempted not to export the pte functions.
> > > 
> > > Yes paravirt_ops should be probably split into two for internal and external
> > > available functions. Any takers? 
> > 
> > Hi Andi!
> > 
> > 	I'm a little uncomfortable with cutting the struct this way: I always
> > thought it'd be a function split if we did one.
> 
> It's a functional split, isn't it? arch/mm internal and "exported" to other
> users

Hi,

	When I said functional I was thinking "page table ops" vs "apic ops"
etc.  There's little logic to what needs exporting.

	Most modules only need the interrupt operations.  A small handful want
more, and then some (kvm, lguest) need a whole range of crap (these
should use the native_ versions directly, since nested paravirt is not
supported).

I did the work before; I'll drag it back out and see what the symbols
are again...

Rusty.