Eduardo Habkost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I am still wondering if a simple function pointer (instead of a full > notifier interface) would be good enough. It looks like a reasonable > tradeoff.
Oh sorry. As long as we do the whole rcu protected thing so it is safe to call the function without taking locks it should work. I'm not thrilled about a function pointer but it should work. > I think I will get flamed if I try to pull to the core a bunch of code > that always lived in the KVM module. 8) Why is KVM modular anyway? That seems like some pretty core cpu functionality... > And even if we pull those functions to the core, we will still have > a function pointer on the new code anyway, because we would need to > support vmx and svm. Depending. It doesn't sound like svm has the problem where init doesn't work so svm really doesn't need to do this. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
