[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071211173717.GA26368@uranus.ravnborg.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:37:17 +0100
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
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
On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 06:15:40PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> >On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 11:47:39AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >
> >>KVM is due to receive support for multiple architectures (ppc, ia64, and
> >>s390, in addition to the existing x86), hopefully in time for the 2.6.25
> >>merge window. It is awkward to place the new arch support in
> >>drivers/kvm/, so I'd like to propose the following new layout:
> >>
> >> virt/ top-level directory for hypervisors
> >> virt/kvm/ kvm common code
> >> virt/lguest/ the other hypervisor
> >> arch/*/kvm/ arch dependent kvm code
> >>
> >
> >The arch/*/dir shall use same dir-name as used
> >in top-level directory.
> >
>
> Well, it isn't like that now (arch/x86/oprofile, etc.)
oprofile is now the best leader to follow in this respect.
Just look at the utterly crap in their makefiles.
> >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/
Seems logical and fit the way we handle mm/ versus arch/*/mm,
kernel/ arch/*/kernel etc.
Are there any dependencies between the arch and non-arch files
such as they are combined in a single module?
Sam
--
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