From: pbonzini@redhat.com (Paolo Bonzini)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/2] ARM: KVM: move GIC/timer code to a common location
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 10:09:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <518CAB24.3040000@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f816c184d2512dad242b383deac7453e@localhost>
Il 10/05/2013 09:23, Marc Zyngier ha scritto:
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 11:11:01 -0700, Christoffer Dall
> <cdall@cs.columbia.edu>
> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 03:02:52PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> As KVM/arm64 is looming on the horizon, it makes sense to move some
>>> of the common code to a single location in order to reduce duplication.
>>>
>>> The code could live anywhere. Actually, most of KVM is already built
>>> with a bunch of ugly ../../.. hacks in the various Makefiles, so we're
>>> not exactly talking about style here. But maybe it is time to start
>>> moving into a less ugly direction.
>>>
>>> The include files must be in a "public" location, as they are accessed
>>> from non-KVM files (arch/arm/kernel/asm-offsets.c).
>>>
>>> For this purpose, introduce two new locations:
>>> - virt/kvm/arm/ : x86 and ia64 already share the ioapic code in
>>> virt/kvm, so this could be seen as a (very ugly) precedent.
>>> - include/kvm/ : there is already an include/xen, and while the
>>> intent is slightly different, this seems as good a location as
>>> any
>>
>> This overall looks ok, just a few points:
>>
>> 1. Should we have a namespace per arch in the include directory, as in
>> include/kvm/arm?
>
> So I thought of that at one point, but discarded the idea because it seems
> to convey the wrong message:
> We're moving the include files because they are architecture independent,
> and referring to an architecture name in the path feels a bit odd. Or maybe
> arm-common?
>
> I don't have strong feelings about it though...
>
>> 2. We could drop the kvm_ prefix from the include files now
>
> Agreed.
>
> It would be interesting to see what the KVM maintainers think of all this.
> Gleb? Paolo?
include/kvm is good, there is no user-level API to care about. Perhaps
you can name the includes kvm/arm_vgic.h and kvm/arm_arch_timer.h. It
keeps the tree shallow but at the same time it suggests some parallel
between the source tree and the include tree.
virt/kvm/arm is certainly better than anything else that comes to mind
:) but I'm not a big fan of $(addprefix); this looks tidier to me:
KVM := ../../../virt/kvm
kvm-arm-y = $(KVM)/kvm_main.o $(KVM)/coalesced_mmio.o
...
+obj-$(CONFIG_KVM_ARM_VGIC) += $(KVM)/arm/vgic.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_KVM_ARM_TIMER) += $(KVM)/arm/arch_timer.o
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-10 8:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-03 14:02 [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM: KVM: Moving GIC/timer out of arch/arm Marc Zyngier
2013-05-03 14:02 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] ARM: KVM: move GIC/timer code to a common location Marc Zyngier
2013-05-09 18:11 ` Christoffer Dall
2013-05-10 7:23 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-05-10 8:09 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2013-05-10 8:11 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-10 8:46 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-05-03 14:02 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] ARM: KVM: standalone Makefile for vgic and timers Marc Zyngier
2013-05-10 9:39 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-10 9:59 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-05-03 15:31 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] ARM: KVM: Moving GIC/timer out of arch/arm Anup Patel
2013-05-03 15:55 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-05-12 9:03 ` Gleb Natapov
2013-05-12 10:23 ` Catalin Marinas
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=518CAB24.3040000@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).