From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Paravirt: fix export of paravirt-ops to
	binary modules
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 11:04:34 +1000
Message-ID: <1177290274.17026.42.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20070420015214.6834BBFC@zach-dev2.vmware.com>
	<200704230149.44137.ak@suse.de>
	<1177287845.17026.27.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<200704230249.29473.ak@suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <200704230249.29473.ak@suse.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization>,
	<mailto:virtualization-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/virtualization>
List-Post: <mailto:virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:virtualization-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization>,
	<mailto:virtualization-request@lists.linux-foundation.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org
Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org
To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Chaz Masden <zamsden@gmail.com>, Petr Vandrovec <petr@vmware.com>, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>, Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@lists.osdl.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org

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.