[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7c5f1b99-9556-09ee-93f4-3a36d43a9c8e@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2018 18:26:14 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
"Singh, Brijesh" <brijesh.singh@....com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Add missing KVM_AMD dependency
On 08/10/2018 19:32, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 02:52:46PM +0000, Singh, Brijesh wrote:
>> Does it make sense to move all the SEV specific code in svm-sev.c ?
>> I am looking to add SEV migration support very soon, and can see
>> myself adding more SEV command handling which will grow svm.c further.
>
> Amen to that - svm.c is pretty huge already. And if you end up moving
> facilities, you can simply call it sev.c
Creating arch/x86/kvm/{mmu,vmx,svm}/ has been on my todo list for a
while. If you would like to split the SEV bits, that would be a good start.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists