From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jes Sorensen Subject: Re: [patch] v4 - fold struct vcpu_info into CPUState Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 14:04:26 +0100 Message-ID: <49085F5A.3040901@sgi.com> References: <48E0F318.7050303@sgi.com> <5d6222a80810131524s7ec55bfyb296085c6c2ac4af@mail.gmail.com> <48F8AF00.1050304@sgi.com> <5d6222a80810171427m252a1cf9he711ab247ae84530@mail.gmail.com> <4901F083.3070006@sgi.com> <1224875457.9634.63.camel@localhost.localdomain> <49058E60.6080507@sgi.com> <1225123341.5543.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> <49073D0C.6030706@sgi.com> <49085E8D.4050305@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Hollis Blanchard , Glauber Costa , kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ia64@vger.kernel.org To: Anthony Liguori Return-path: Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:60131 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753510AbYJ2NEe (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:04:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <49085E8D.4050305@codemonkey.ws> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Anthony Liguori wrote: > FWIW, vcpu_info seems to have nothing to do with KVM. It's entirely > build around the IO thread. The IO thread really isn't KVM specific. > > I would just stick these fields in CPU_COMMON unconditionally if you're > going to move them at all. Hi Anthony, I am quite happy to do that, my main concern was to get rid of the static declaration of the vcpu_info array. Do you prefer we do it all in one go, or rather have this patch, then another patch afterwards that moves them into CPU_COMMON? I'm good with both, I just don't want it to get too complicated so it won't get accepted because of that. Cheers, Jes