From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54525) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dgBtR-0008P2-Dc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 11:30:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dgBtM-0001bQ-CN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 11:30:32 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:57168) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dgBtM-0001b9-5j for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 11:30:28 -0400 References: <20170811074652.31474-1-david@redhat.com> <20170811171515.623cd5c6.cohuck@redhat.com> From: David Hildenbrand Message-ID: <78d35202-a6cd-b71c-16b9-4653739b39bf@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 17:30:23 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170811171515.623cd5c6.cohuck@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/5] target/s390x: introduce internal.h and cleanup cpu.h List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Cornelia Huck Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, rth@twiddle.net, Aurelien Jarno , thuth@redhat.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com On 11.08.2017 17:15, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 09:46:47 +0200 > David Hildenbrand wrote: > >> cpu.h is accessed outside of target/s390x. It should only contain >> what is expected to be accessed outside of this folder. Therefore, create >> internal.h and move a lot to that file. > > Cool, I like that. > >> >> While doing that, I noticed that a lot of function prototypes not >> available with CONFIG_USER_ONLY are not protected by CONFIG_USER_ONLY. >> >> As these CONFIG_USER_ONLY are in general ugly, I decided to minimize >> them to the bare minimum :]. Do we care? I dropped it wherever possible. >> >> My compiler doesn't bail out, so let's see what the bot says. > > That should be easy to fix :) > >> >> There is still a lot to clean up (e.g. do we want kvm-stub.c ?). This is >> the first step. > > Do you plan to send a v2 with kvm_s390x.h? If yes, I'll hold off > looking at this series. > Yes, will take care of the review comments from Richard and Thomas. (including kvm_s390x.h) -- Thanks, David