On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 09:19:57AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 28/12/2016 18:09, Roman Kagan wrote: > > Am I correct assuming that QEMU is currently the only user of > > arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/hyperv.h? > > > > Then I think we're fine withdrawing it from uapi as a whole and letting > > QEMU pull it in through its header-harvesting scripts (as does now > > anyway). This would lift all licensing and longterm API stability > > expectations. > > Actually, QEMU's header-harvesting scripts use uapi/ headers > exclusively, since they are built on "make headers_install". > > The extra cleanups that QEMU does on top are to allow compilation of the > headers on non-Linux machines. They don't really do much more than > changing Linux (linux/types.h) integer types to the C99 (stdint.h) > equivalents. Ouch, I stand corrected. So what should we do with it then? I'm sorta lost... We certainly can give it up and live with a private copy of the definitions in the QEMU tree but that doesn't sound optimal in any sense. Thanks, Roman. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
