From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Js1NK-0007fO-EK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 May 2008 15:56:58 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Js1NI-0007eO-Pp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 May 2008 15:56:58 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47194 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Js1NI-0007eF-Fl
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 May 2008 15:56:56 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gcosta@redhat.com>) id 1Js1NH-0003FE-Vi
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 May 2008 15:56:56 -0400
Message-ID: <481B705A.8010203@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 16:49:46 -0300
From: Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/4] [PATCH] introduce QEMUAccel and fill
	it with interrupt specific driver
References: <12097505533742-git-send-email-gcosta@redhat.com>
	<1209750562292-git-send-email-gcosta@redhat.com>
	<20080502181607.GA2827@shareable.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080502181607.GA2827@shareable.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, mtosatti@redhat.com, Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>

Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Glauber Costa wrote:
>> This patch introduces QEMUAccel, a placeholder for function pointers
>> that aims at helping qemu to abstract accelerators such as kqemu and
>> kvm (actually, the 'accelerator' name was proposed by avi kivity, since
>> he loves referring to kvm that way).
> 
> Just a little thought...
> 
> Maybe 'VCPU' would be a clearer name?  QEMU provides its own VCPU, and
> KQEMU+QEMU also provide one toegether.  While KVM provides essentially
> one or more whole VCPUs by itself and uses QEMU's drivers only doesn't
> it?
> 
> -- Jamie
VCPU is rather confusing with the vcpus themselves. KVM, for instance,
has its own structures called "vcpu".

If it is preferred, however, we can name the structure VCPUOperations,
and change the function names that involves accel_yyy to vcpu_op_yyy()

What do you think?