Re: RFC/patch portability: split kvm_vcpu_ioctl v1

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

Carsten Otte wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Applied, thanks.  I renamed kvm_vcpu_load() and kvm_vcpu_put() back
>> to vcpu_load() and vcpu_put() in order to keep the patch small and
>> simple, and because I'm emotionally attached to the original names.
> Oh, I think I had a very good reason for renaming it: it's no longer
> static, and thus part of the kernel's global namespace in case kvm is
> built-in. As far as I know, modules are expected to prefix any symbol
> they use with their module name.
> I am sorry for the emotional part of it, I tend to stick to old names
> too once I got used to them.
> In case you decide you want kvm_vcpu_load/put again, let me know so
> that I can supply a patch on top of git that renames it.

I agree 100%, I'm just using the "keep the patch dead simple" excuse to
delay the change.  We can have a 'add kvm_ prefix' patch round later. 
Let's complete the separation first.

There are some bigger offenders too, like set_crX(), which don't even
start with the magic V and are exported to modules.

-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.


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