From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Avoid using CONFIG_ in userspace visible headers
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:31:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4974809C.3030904@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090119132214.GA20722@elte.hu>
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> btw., would be nice to somehow untangle consciously-exported interface
> definitions from kernel side bits, and standardize these
> feature/capability flags like __KVM_HAVE_IOAPIC, etc.
>
> Right now we have this body of 75,000 lines of code spread out in 600+
> header files that are so-called 'exported' to user-space, but 95% of that
> interface definition code is never being relied on by any user-space bit!
> They are exported due to cargo-cult mentality or due to dependencies.
>
> It would be far better to have an explicit place for such bits,
> include/syscall-ABI/ or so - and not export _any_ other kernel headers.
> But that's a much larger project.
>
Yes, kvm has non-interface stuff in <linux/kvm_host.h>, so there's at
least some separation. All of <linux/kvm.h> is needed by userspace.
What's more painful to me in this area is advertising what's exported.
Right now userspace has to rely on the kernel version to see what
features are supported, but that doesn't work if a feature is backported
or removed. KVM has KVM_CHECK_EXTENSION which I'd love to see standardized.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-19 13:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-19 13:00 [PATCH] KVM: Avoid using CONFIG_ in userspace visible headers Avi Kivity
2009-01-19 13:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-19 13:12 ` Avi Kivity
2009-01-19 13:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-19 13:31 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2009-01-19 16:29 ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-01-19 16:35 ` Avi Kivity
2009-01-19 16:32 ` Sam Ravnborg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4974809C.3030904@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox