[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ec1a1f29-ac61-0f3f-4d63-3ab26fa8bf67@linux.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 23:00:53 +0300
From: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/apic: Introduce paravirq irq_domain
On 15.08.2016 15:37, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 15/08/2016 13:51, Alexander Popov wrote:
>> On 13.08.2016 09:20, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> So just let the irqdomain know about your hypervisor and avoid the
>>> pointless indirection through function pointers, and only call
>>> arch_init_paravirq_domain in a file specific to your hypervisor.
>>
>> Paolo, I would like paravirq irq_domain to be useful for many hypervisors,
>> not only for one developed by Positive Technologies.
>
> If somebody else comes up with similar needs, leave the generalization
> of the code to them. The maintainers will surely remember. Without two
> users, there's a nonzero chance that the abstraction you have is not
> good enough, and actually gets in the way of the "second user".
Ok. I'll return with v2. Thank you.
Best regards,
Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists