Re: [ANNOUNCE] qemu-kvm-0.13.0-rc1

[Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>]

  On 09/12/2010 05:31 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 09/12/2010 01:11 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>  On 09/10/2010 10:48 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>> I agree, is there any reason not to enable compiling less into the 
>>>> binary?
>>>> There are folks interested in eliminating as much as possible to 
>>>> reduce
>>>> the attack surface and auditing requirements, for example.
>>>
>>> It's not a bad idea, it's just that what --disable-cpu-emulation 
>>> does is evil.  Being that I wrote the implementation, I'm quite 
>>> confident in declare it as such :-)
>>>
>>
>> Oh, I thought you were against the idea in itself for some reason.
>>
>> I'll patch it for 0.13, but any ideas on how it should be rework for 
>> master?
>
> Glauber's old Accel interface was close to the right approach.  We 
> need to abstract the exec.c interfaces to use a function pointer table 
> and have a TCG and KVM implementation.  The function pointer tables 
> can then be registered by a module_init() and we can simply not 
> include the kvm or TCG files are build time to disable the functionality.

Yes, I remember it now.

Glauber, can you bring those patches back from the land of the dead?

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function