From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756462AbZFLQz0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:55:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751865AbZFLQzS (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:55:18 -0400 Received: from claw.goop.org ([74.207.240.146]:50909 "EHLO claw.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751834AbZFLQzS (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:55:18 -0400 Message-ID: <4A328873.4000802@goop.org> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:55:15 -0700 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090513 Fedora/3.0-2.3.beta2.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86/paravirt: clean up paravirt.h and optimise FPU context switch References: <1244748040-27185-1-git-send-email-jeremy@goop.org> <20090612112933.GA14930@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20090612112933.GA14930@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/12/09 04:29, Ingo Molnar wrote: > I havent checked all headers but do we now use the principle that we > only include paravirt_types.h into other headers - and paravirt.h > only into .c code that makes use of methods? > No, not really. The headers which currently define the native versions of the inline functions need to include paravirt.h (as they currently do). In fact, there are very few places which actually care about the definitions in paravirt_types.h as opposed to the inline functions; the main reason for the split was to do make paravirt tracing possible (but that's not ready yet, as we haven't come to a satisfactory conclusion about the rcu include in tracepoint.h). J