From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44036)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <agraf@suse.de>) id 1Semlj-0002Gv-CE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 08:33:57 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <agraf@suse.de>) id 1Semld-0002Zx-6f
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 08:33:50 -0400
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:46443 helo=mx2.suse.de)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <agraf@suse.de>) id 1Semld-0002Zl-03
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 08:33:45 -0400
Message-ID: <4FD888A1.7070604@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:33:37 +0200
From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1338984323-21914-1-git-send-email-jfrei@de.ibm.com>
	<1338984323-21914-3-git-send-email-jfrei@de.ibm.com>
	<4FD70CC0.7000901@suse.de> <4FD725EB.7050501@de.ibm.com>
	<4FD72EC2.2010105@suse.de> <4FD72FD4.6020008@de.ibm.com>
	<4FD73220.5000408@suse.de> <4FD86BB1.9060900@siemens.com>
	<4FD87156.10705@suse.de> <4FD8724A.6020704@siemens.com>
	<4FD87939.8060304@de.ibm.com> <4FD87C6F.8050007@siemens.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FD87C6F.8050007@siemens.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/8] s390: autodetect map private
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: Jens Freimann <jfrei@de.ibm.com>, Heinz Graalfs <graalfs@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>, Jens Freimann <jfrei@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>

On 06/13/2012 01:41 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-06-13 13:27, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>> On 13/06/12 12:58, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>> Thinking about this a bit more, how about
>>>>
>>>> } else if (!kvm_arch_vmalloc(size,&new_block->host)) {
>>>> <normal code>
>>>> }
>>>>
>> I like that. Of course, we have to have a generic kvm_arch_vmalloc implementation
>> then.
> Then better go for kvm_vmalloc calling kvm_arch_vmalloc (in the s390 case).
>
> However, I do not like the variation of parameters and return value
> compared to normal *alloc. Better:
>
> memory = kvm_vmalloc(size);
> if (!memory)
> 	memory = qemu_vmalloc(size);
>
> But more regular (when looking at the Xen block) is guarding the call
> with kvm_enabled() and embedding qemu_vmalloc in kvm_vmalloc.

So basically

#ifdef CONFIG_TARGET_S390X
   } else if (kvm_enabled()) {
     memory = kvm_vmalloc();
   } else {
#endif

or a generic

} else if (kvm_enabled()) {
   memory = kvm_vmalloc();
} else {

? Because that one would mean we always duplicate the common 
qemu_vmalloc case. But then again, that one's only a single call, so 
maybe it's ok. Meh - I'll let you decide :).


Alex