Re: [PATCH] 3/5 Using kvm arch support instead of kvm_x86_ops

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

Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>   
>> Carsten Otte wrote:
>>     
>>> I still do strongly agree with the general idea of this patch, and
>>> most of the split comes out just right now. However, there is one
>>> thing I'd like to pick on: 
>>>
>>> decache_vcpus_on_cpu should be an arch callback, and rather than
>>> kvm_arch_vcpu_decache. There's no reason for s390 to grab locks and
>>> do the arch callback in a loop. The whole thing is nop for us, thus
>>> the whole thing should be a callback.
>>>
>>> I'd really like to see this changed before the patch gets merged.
>>>       
>> Xiantao, can you address this?
>>     
>
> Yes,  adressed in attached patch. :)
>   

Just to be sure:  this is a replacement for your previous #3 patch, all 
the rest remain unchanged?

-- 
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/