Re: [PATCH] [RFC] try to reduce kvm impact in core qemu code.

[Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>]

Glauber Costa wrote:
> Hi. This is a proposal for reducing the impact of kvm functions in core qemu
> code. This is by all means not ready, but I felt like posting it, so a discussion
> on it could follow.
>
> The idea in this patch is to replace the specific kvm details from core qemu files
> like vl.c, with driver_yyy() functions. When kvm is not running, those functions would
> just return (most of time), absolutely reducing the impact of kvm code.
>
> As I wanted to test it, in this patch I changed the kvm functions to be called driver_yyy(),
> but that's not my final goal. I intend to use a function pointer schema, similar to what the linux
> kernel already do for a lot of its subsystem, to isolate the changes.
>
> Comments deeply welcome.
>   

While I would be very annoyed if someone referred to kvm as a qemu 
accelerator, I think accelerator_yyy() is more descriptive than 
driver_yyy().

I did not see any references to kqemu, but I imagine you mean this to 
abstract kqemu support as well.

Other than that, looks really good.

-- 
Any sufficiently difficult bug is indistinguishable from a feature.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone