Zhang, Xiantao wrote: >> >> x86 will continue to use kvm_x86_ops for that purposes. But other >> archs should not. >> >> x86 will use both mechanisms: first, linkage will select the x86 >> function, and then kvm_x86_ops will be used to select the >> implementation dependent code. The two levels are very different as >> kvm_x86_ops is very low level and x86 specific. >> > Hi Avi, > Maybe linkage is a better choice. But if we need to maintain two > different implmentation for different archs, it may introduce > unnecessary effort. > In addition, I can't figure out any disadvantages with function > pointers, moreover, it makes source uniform for all architectures, > though it is not very necessary. >
Linkage is more efficient (though I don't think we'll be able to measure the difference) and is also the traditional way of doing things in Linux. I don't see why it causes extra effort. Can you explain? -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
