From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 10/21] Xen-paravirt: Name: dont export
 paravirt_ops structure, do individual functions
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:06:42 -0800
Message-ID: <45D260A2.4010200@vmware.com>
References: <20070213221729.772002682@goop.org>
	<20070213221830.238235953@goop.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070213221830.238235953@goop.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, virtualization@lists.osdl.org, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Wrap the paravirt_ops members we want to export in wrapper functions.
> Since we binary-patch the critical ones, this doesn't make a speed
> impact.
>
> I moved drm_follow_page into the core, to avoid having to wrap the
> various pte ops.  Unlining kernel_fpu_end and using that in the RAID6
> code would remove the need to export clts/read_cr0/write_cr0 too.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org>
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xensource.com>
>
> ===================================================================
> --- a/arch/i386/kernel/paravirt.c
> +++ b/arch/i386/kernel/paravirt.c
> @@ -596,6 +596,123 @@ static int __init print_banner(void)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  core_initcall(print_banner);
> +
> +unsigned long paravirt_save_flags(void)
> +{
> +	return paravirt_ops.save_fl();
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(paravirt_save_flags);
> +
> +void paravirt_restore_flags(unsigned long flags)
> +{
> +	paravirt_ops.restore_fl(flags);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(paravirt_restore_flags);
> +
> +void paravirt_irq_disable(void)
> +{
> +	paravirt_ops.irq_disable();
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(paravirt_irq_disable);
> +
> +void paravirt_irq_enable(void)
> +{
> +	paravirt_ops.irq_enable();
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(paravirt_irq_enable);
>   

This turned out really hideous looking to me.  Can't we split the struct 
into GPL'd and non-GPL'd functions instead?  We still have the same 
granularity, and none of this function call to an indirect function call 
nonsense.

Zach