From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ME4AG-0001d4-Lu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2009 12:27:08 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ME4AB-0001aN-Ky
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2009 12:27:08 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56084 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ME4AB-0001a0-Bi
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2009 12:27:03 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:37655)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1ME4AA-0003sX-VB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Jun 2009 12:27:03 -0400
Message-ID: <4A2E8D52.4080600@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 19:26:58 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] create kvm-shared-all.c and kvm-shared.h
References: <1244563466-32598-1-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com>
	<4A2E8B15.3010401@siemens.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A2E8B15.3010401@siemens.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: Glauber Costa <glommer@redhat.com>, aliguori@us.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Glauber Costa wrote:
>   
>> Following a suggestion given by Jan, the idea here is to
>> move shared pieces between qemu and qemu-kvm.git into a common
>> file, so we can do sharing while avoid clashes.
>>
>> In the future, this files should disappear.
>>
>>     
>
> OK for the header - but why do we have to push the ioctl services into a
> separate module? Will all functions qemu-kvm start to use from upstream
> have to be pushed around? Or what is special about the ioctls?
>
> I rather think qemu-kvm should build kvm-all.c and #ifdef out those
> parts which collide with its own implementation. Moreover, when we morph
> qemu-kvm services for upstream, this could already happen where they
> shall once be located: in kvm-all.c or target-*/kvm.c.
>   

Yes, we could simply append libkvm-all.c and qemu-kvm.c to kvm-all.c, 
and gradually include more of kvm-all.c as we delete parts of libkvm.c 
and qemu-kvm.c.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function