From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Carsten Otte <cotte-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: RFC/patch: a very trivial patch towards portability
 V2.1
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:59:45 +0200
Message-ID: <470CDAD1.3020102@de.ibm.com>
References: <1191946167.7292.3.camel@cotte.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>	
	<1192019827.17745.9.camel@cotte.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
	<1192020355.17877.4.camel@cotte.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
	<470CD1F7.1030400@qumranet.com>
Reply-To: carsteno-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org" <kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Return-path: <kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <470CD1F7.1030400-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel>,
	<mailto:kvm-devel-request-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=kvm-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>
List-Help: <mailto:kvm-devel-request-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel>,
	<mailto:kvm-devel-request-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Argument names in prototypes please.
Will do that.

>>  	case KVM_CHECK_EXTENSION: {
>>  		int ext = (long)argp;
>>  
>> -		switch (ext) {
>> -		case KVM_CAP_IRQCHIP:
>> -		case KVM_CAP_HLT:
>> -		case KVM_CAP_MMU_SHADOW_CACHE_CONTROL:
>> -		case KVM_CAP_USER_MEMORY:
>> -			r = 1;
>> -			break;
>> -		default:
>> -			r = 0;
>> -			break;
>> -		}
>> +		r = kvm_arch_check_extension(ext);
>>  		break;
>>
>>   
> 
> 
> Reflecting some more, do we want different API availablility for 
> different archs?  We can make this generic, and ignore arch-specific 
> extensions.
> 
> But on the other hand, things like KVM_CAP_IRQCHIP _are_ applicable to 
> powerpc, but may not be implemented from day 1... should we do
> 
> case KVM_CAP_IRQCHIP:
>     return KVM_ARCH_HAS_IRQCHIP;
> 
> ?
Will do that too.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/