Zachary Amsden wrote:
> 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.
It's not pretty, but I think having paravirt_ops and paravirt_ops_gpl
would be worse. I'd be sympathetic to the idea of splitting
paravirt_ops up by function groupings, but splitting it by license seems
like a maintenance headache with no real upside. Besides, patching will
solve everything (tm).
J
