On 07/24/2012 03:26 PM, Bhushan Bharat-R65777 wrote:
+struct kvmppc_debug_reg {
+#ifdef CONFIG_BOOKE
+ u32 dbcr0;
+ u32 dbcr1;
+ u32 dbcr2;
+#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_E500MC
+ u32 dbcr4;
+#endif
+ u64 iac[KVMPPC_MAX_IAC];
+ u64 dac[KVMPPC_MAX_DAC];
+#endif
+};
Is there any reason for this to be a separate struct?
No specific reason, The rest of debug ( which will follow sometime
soon) uses
this structure and looks to make code look easy.
So why not use an fsl / booke specific struct for the debug patches
then? Debug registers are really nothing common between book3s and
booke, so we shouldn't treat them as such by using the same struct
definition.
All elements of struct are under #ifdef CONFIG_BOOKE? So for book3s it is as
good as void, only struct type if declared. Do you want the struct type also
under config_booke ?
struct kvmppc_booke_debug_reg {
<lots of defines>
};
struct kvmppc_book3s_debug_reg {
<lots of other defines>
};
void booke_foo() {
struct kvmppc_booke_debug_reg r;
kvmppc_booke_debug_reg or kvmppc_book3s_debug_reg ?
In booke_foo() you certainly will never want to use struct
kvmppc_book3s_debug_reg, no?
Alex
--
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
