Re: [PATCH] KVM: Remove arch specific components from the general code

[Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>]

Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>>
>>> Hmm..well, you still have pointers.  The advantage is that they are
>>> implicitly maintained, but now you have to do pointer arithmetic to
>>> compute it. :(  I personally would probably rather have the explicit
>>> management code than the run-time overhead....
>>>   
>>>       
>> Well, the pointer arithmetic consists of adding or subtracting zero, 
>> which gcc luckily knows how to deal with.
>>     
>
> Ah....i see.  The trick is that we make it the first field.  Clever!
>
>   

Even if it isn't the first field, it's worthwhile.

>> It's the equivalent of C++ inheritance; no overhead at all.
>>     
>
> You mean non-virtuals, right ;)
>
>   

Yeah, plain old derived classes but with verbose syntax.

>   
>> Paul Turner did something much like yours, 
>>     
>
> Ah, wasn't aware, thanks.  What is the status?  I guess I came this far,
> so I will make the final change and you can take it or leave it at your
> discretion.  The important thing is to get this cleaned up more than who
> did it, IMO.
>   

Sure.  I'm going to take the first patch that's clean enough.  So far 
this is yours except for that pointer thing, which looks like it depends 
on per-arch allocation, which conflicts with the vcpu array work.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/