Re: RFC/patch portability: split kvm_vm_ioctl v2

[Carsten Otte <cotte-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
> I don't think we can move the whole function to arch-specific part,
> because  it should work well (or with few issues) for most archs.
> Basically, IA64 mostly can use it directly. If we move them as
> arch-specific, it will introduces many duplicates. As you said, S390 has
> quite difference about this side, but I think maybe we can use macros,
> such as #ifndef CONFIG_S390 to comment out them, and S390 define it in
> your arch-specific portions. Any other good ideas ?
I really dislike CONFIG_ARCH sections. They are usually a strong 
indication that proper interfaces between arch dependent and arch 
independent code have not been found just yet. If you look at old 
subsystems where lots of engineers had time to optimize the code, like 
memory management for example, you rarely find #ifdefs at all. I think 
that should be our goal.
As for KVM_SET_USER_MEMORY_REGION, the function you pointed at, I've 
left it in common for now in patch version 3.

thanks for your review,
Carsten

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