RE: [PATCH RFC] paravirt_ops: refactor struct paravirt_ops into smaller pv_*_ops

["Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>]

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> This patch refactors the paravirt_ops structure into groups of
> functionally related ops:
> 
> pv_info - random info, rather than function entrypoints
> pv_init_ops - functions used at boot time (some for module_init too)
> pv_misc_ops - lazy mode, which didn't fit well anywhere else
> pv_time_ops - time-related functions
> pv_cpu_ops - various privileged instruction ops
> pv_irq_ops - operations for managing interrupt state
> pv_apic_ops - APIC operations
> pv_mmu_ops - operations for managing pagetables
> 

Good. These make sense to me.

> +	.pv_irq_ops = {
> +		 .init_IRQ = native_init_IRQ,
> +		 .save_fl = native_save_fl,
> +		 .restore_fl = native_restore_fl,
> +		 .irq_disable = native_irq_disable,
> +		 .irq_enable = native_irq_enable,
> +		 .safe_halt = native_safe_halt,
> +		 .halt = native_halt,
> +	 },

I think the halt stuff should be moved to pv_cpu_ops?

> +	.pv_misc_ops = {
> +		 .set_lazy_mode = paravirt_nop,
> +	 },

Or you can split it to pv_cpu_ops and pv_mmu_ops, assuming that they
don't need to interact with each other in terms of the lazy handling.

Jun
---
Intel Open Source Technology Center
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/