qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v12 16/23] cpu: Move synchronize_from_tb() to tcg_ops


From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 16/23] cpu: Move synchronize_from_tb() to tcg_ops
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 22:56:13 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0

Hi Claudio, Eduardo.

On 12/14/20 8:10 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 04:55:23PM +0100, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>> From: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
>>
>> since tcg_cpu_ops.h is only included in cpu.h,
>> and as a standalone header it is not really useful,
>> as tcg_cpu_ops.h starts requiring cpu.h defines,
>> enums, etc, as well as (later on in the series),
>> additional definitions coming from memattr.h.
>>
>> Therefore rename it to tcg_cpu_ops.h.inc, to warn
>> any potential user that this file is not a standalone
>> header, but rather a partition of cpu.h that is
>> included conditionally if CONFIG_TCG is true.
> 
> What's the benefit of moving definitions to a separate file, if
> the new file is not a standalone header?

Claudio, I haven't been following every respin. If you did that
change just to please me then the circular dependency remarked by
Richard, then if it simplify the series I'm OK if you have to
remove the includes.

Eduardo, if you are happy with patches 1-8 (x86 specific), maybe
you can queue them already. The rest is more TCG generic and
will likely go via Richard/Paolo trees IMO.

> 
> If moving the definitions to a separate header is going to
> require too much work, it's completely OK to keep them in cpu.h
> by now, and try to move them later.
> 
> I'm worried that the scope of this series is growing too much,
> and discussion/review of additional changes in each new version
> is preventing us from merging the original changes where we
> already had some consensus.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]