From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Kiszka Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] kvm: remove unused variables Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 10:42:22 +0200 Message-ID: <4DF8706E.4030302@siemens.com> References: <4DF8617F.20700@redhat.com> <20110615082532.GA31267@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Kevin Wolf , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Paul Brook , Gerd Hoffmann , Anthony Liguori , Riku Voipio , Richard Henderson , Avi Kivity , Marcelo Tosatti , Alex Williamson , Blue Swirl , Stefan Weil , Paolo Bonzini , Christoph Hellwig , Aurelien Jarno , Stefan Hajnoczi , Alexander Graf , Isaku Yamahata , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Return-path: Received: from goliath.siemens.de ([192.35.17.28]:25805 "EHLO goliath.siemens.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753373Ab1FOInH (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jun 2011 04:43:07 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110615082532.GA31267@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2011-06-15 10:25, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 09:38:39AM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: >> Am 14.06.2011 19:36, schrieb Michael S. Tsirkin: >>> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin >>> --- >>> hw/virtio-pci.h | 8 +++++--- >>> target-i386/kvm.c | 3 +-- >>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/hw/virtio-pci.h b/hw/virtio-pci.h >>> index a4b5fd3..b518917 100644 >>> --- a/hw/virtio-pci.h >>> +++ b/hw/virtio-pci.h >>> @@ -37,7 +37,9 @@ typedef struct { >>> bool ioeventfd_started; >>> } VirtIOPCIProxy; >>> >>> -extern void virtio_init_pci(VirtIOPCIProxy *proxy, VirtIODevice *vdev, >>> - uint16_t vendor, uint16_t device, >>> - uint16_t class_code, uint8_t pif); >>> +void virtio_init_pci(VirtIOPCIProxy *proxy, VirtIODevice *vdev); >>> + >>> +/* Virtio ABI version, if we increment this, we break the guest driver. */ >>> +#define VIRTIO_PCI_ABI_VERSION 0 >>> + >>> #endif >> >> Is this hunk there intentionally? >> >> Kevin > > Sorry, this belongs in another patch. > Thanks for pointing this out. > Otherwise ack? I've still the true fix pending, but there are concerns about the associated savevm version increase for the CPU. Not sure what will happen the next days till -rc0, so we may also go with any of these removal patches (you weren't the first by far). Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux