From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Js1q8-0006cq-6x
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 May 2008 16:26:44 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Js1q6-0006cS-1m
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 May 2008 16:26:43 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56829 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Js1q5-0006cP-Sa
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 May 2008 16:26:41 -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 1Js1q5-0003AX-M4
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 02 May 2008 16:26:41 -0400
Message-ID: <481B76D5.40607@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 17:17:25 -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>
	<20080502181607.GA2827@shareable.org> <481B705A.8010203@redhat.com>
	<200805022116.29278.paul@codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <200805022116.29278.paul@codesourcery.com>
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: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Cc: kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, mtosatti@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Paul Brook wrote:
>>> 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()
> 
> kvm wants to hook into more than just the CPU doesn't it?
But so far, the structure I proposed only touches cpu-related things.
We can have two structures for clarity. Like MEMOperations, and so far.
We do it this way for paravirt_ops in linux, with good results in code 
clarity.