[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <97255084-7b10-73a5-bfb4-fdc1d5cc0f6e@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 16:27:21 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Cc: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Make fpu allocation a common function
On 15/10/19 12:53, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> A very theoretical question: why do we have 'struct vcpu' embedded in
> vcpu_vmx/vcpu_svm and not the other way around (e.g. in a union)? That
> would've allowed us to allocate memory in common code and then fill in
> vendor-specific details in .create_vcpu().
Probably "because it's always been like that" is the most accurate answer.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists