From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LBhfo-0006MK-PU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:29:40 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LBhfn-0006Kk-4B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:29:40 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=48572 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LBhfm-0006KX-Tm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:29:38 -0500 Received: from yx-out-1718.google.com ([74.125.44.158]:8494) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LBhfm-0005sW-MV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:29:38 -0500 Received: by yx-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 3so965491yxi.82 for ; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 19:29:38 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <49447D9E.30903@codemonkey.ws> Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:29:34 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/6] Enable KVM for ppcemb. References: <1229028752-9480-1-git-send-email-hollisb@us.ibm.com> <49418662.8000205@codemonkey.ws> <1229036053.26586.41.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1229218622.8075.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1229218622.8075.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> 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: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Hollis Blanchard Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org Hollis Blanchard wrote: > On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 16:54 -0600, Hollis Blanchard wrote: > >>> I don't know that kvm_ppc.c is a very information name for this sort >>> >> of >> >>> stuff. Since this is really host specific, not target specific, why >>> >> not >> >>> move it out of target-ppc. >>> >> I could combine kvm_ppc.c into target-ppc/kvm.c. However, they're >> really >> two different things, and I thought it would cause the least confusion >> if they were logically separate. Most of it is hooks required by >> common >> code, and then some of it isn't. (I'm thinking about e.g. IA64 doing a >> copy/paste, and then wondering which functions they actually need to >> implement.) Regardless, I will still need a kvm_ppc.h, so kvm_ppc.c >> seemed like a good place to match. >> > > Any further thoughts on this issue? It's the only issue I still have > unresolved from the initial reviews. > No, we can fix it later when someone comes up with a better idea. Regards, Anthony Liguori