On 09/13/2010 09:03 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Am 13.09.2010 20:56, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 09/13/2010 01:52 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Am 13.09.2010 19:54, Avi Kivity wrote:
The symbol KVM_UPSTREAM is used to mark sections of code that are
part of
the upstream kvm implemetation that is not used in qemu-kvm. However
the
name becomes ambiguous if qemu-kvm is merged upstream.
I doubt this is describing all cases correctly as well. Some changes
should rather happen the other way around (e.g. you surely don't want to
obsolete x86 kvm_arch_put/get_registers in favor of
kvm_arch_load/save_regs, do you?).
There's really no perfect name to describe what we're actually doing
here. It's probably not a detail worth worrying that much about.
I don't mind the name as long as it doesn't reflect the strategy (but
why this change at all then?).
It would be silly to have a define KVM_UPSTREAM in upstream.
Jan (who would prefer to have the time for doing the cleanups)
Hopefully, with a single source base doing the cleanups would be easier,
so a more efficient use of the time we have.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
