From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: device: add simple registration mechanism for kvm_device_ops Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 19:32:59 +0200 Message-ID: <53B19F4B.2020701@redhat.com> References: <1403803817-22140-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com> <20140630112114.2f185502.cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com> <53B19CEF.6080702@redhat.com> <20140630173115.GF30740@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Cornelia Huck , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" , Gleb Natapov , Marc Zyngier , Christoffer Dall To: Will Deacon Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:32593 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753233AbaF3RdW (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jun 2014 13:33:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20140630173115.GF30740@arm.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Il 30/06/2014 19:31, Will Deacon ha scritto: >> > It would let Will keep the simpler code with an array, and autogenerate >> > KVM_DEV_TYPE_MAX. > Although this is uapi, so we may need to #define the symbols anyway to avoid > breaking userspace #ifndef tests. > > What do you reckon; is this an ABI break? Yes, it would be an API break. But you can also do this: #define FOO FOO I think there are other occurrences of this in uapi/. Paolo