From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jes Sorensen Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Modify lguest32 to make room for lguest64 Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 11:50:43 +0200 Message-ID: <46C02973.6030709@sgi.com> References: <20070809003211.373543702@goodmis.org> <1186803724.30899.62.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1186803724.30899.62.camel@localhost.localdomain> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Rusty Russell Cc: Carsten Otte , lguest , lkml - Kernel Mailing List , virtualization , Andrew Morton List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Rusty Russell wrote: > Yeah, after some more thought I've not applied most of this. We really > don't want to move everything then move it back; I prefer Jes' more > cautious approach of moving a little bit at a time. > > We really have three parts: (1) bits that are generic, (2) bits that > should be generic but my implementation is naive, (3) bits that really > are i386-specific. I have actually been using Steven's patchset to do my work, but in a way it's a tool. Moving things out of the way in bulk and see whats missing kinda helps for that :) > Patches which move 2 to 1 are gratefully accepted: I realize a mass move > is easier and this requires thought, but that's what we need. > > Since I can't build a module over two directories, that seems to destroy > the idea of an i386/ subdir. Instead I've done a patch which renames > the *clearly* i386-specific things to i386_, which at least works. > I've pushed it into the repository http://lguest.ozlabs.org/patches/ That works - alternatively we could build two modules, lg and lg_ and just have lg pull in the arch one as well? I'm not really biased, but I think it will get messy later once we add ia64 and x86_64 to the directory. Cheers, Jes