From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42233) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UbzNV-0007DR-2i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2013 16:29:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UbzNR-0000T9-5v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2013 16:29:49 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:16664) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UbzNQ-0000Sz-UW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2013 16:29:45 -0400 Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 23:29:41 +0300 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20130513202941.GB4368@redhat.com> References: <4f3e255de05cb2779760c6559aba4b8c2bb09634.1368474222.git.mst@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 01/13] apic: rename apic specific bitopts List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: seabios@seabios.org, lersek@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Anthony Liguori On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 09:22:20PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 13 May 2013 21:00, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > apic has its own version of bitops, with the > > difference that it works on u32 and not long. > > Add apic_ prefix to avoid namespace clashes. > > Wouldn't it be better to consolidate so we only have > one set of bitops rather than a local set in this file? > > thanks > -- PMM Yes but I'd like this patchset to focus on acpi. ATM including bitops in pc.h gives build errors. Thus this trivial patch, can be tested by comparing binary. Consolidation is better done in a separate patchset, and would need more testing. Any chance you can do this on top of this? -- MST