| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 19:42:28 +0200 From: Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com> To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org> CC: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kvm-devel <kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposed new directory layout for kvm and virtualization Sam Ravnborg wrote: > >>> So use arch/*/virt/kvm/ if kvm really requires >>> a subdirectory of it own. Preferably not. >>> A handful of files named kvm* does not warrant their own >>> subdirectory IMO. >>> >>> >>> >> We'll have 5-6 x86 specific files. >> >> Where do you suggest we place them? >> > /arch/x86/virt/ > > But, I want to place the arch independent files in virt/kvm/, so as to leave room for virt/lguest/. > Seems logical and fit the way we handle mm/ versus arch/*/mm, > kernel/ arch/*/kernel etc. > Exactly, so virt/kvm/ -> arch/x86/virt/kvm/. > Are there any dependencies between the arch and non-arch files > such as they are combined in a single module? > > Yes, they are combined into a single module. In the case of x86, some of arch/x86/... will be combined with virt/kvm/ to form kvm.ko, while others will generate kvm-intel.ko and kvm-amd.ko. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists