Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755037AbXLKRgR (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:36:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753168AbXLKRgE (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:36:04 -0500 Received: from pasmtpa.tele.dk ([80.160.77.114]:58442 "EHLO pasmtpA.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753104AbXLKRgD (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 12:36:03 -0500 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:37:17 +0100 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Avi Kivity Cc: linux-kernel , kvm-devel Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposed new directory layout for kvm and virtualization Message-ID: <20071211173717.GA26368@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <475E5CBB.9080608@qumranet.com> <20071211161032.GA25769@uranus.ravnborg.org> <475EB7AC.9040903@qumranet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <475EB7AC.9040903@qumranet.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1619 Lines: 47 On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 06:15:40PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > Sam Ravnborg wrote: > >On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 11:47:39AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > > >>KVM is due to receive support for multiple architectures (ppc, ia64, and > >>s390, in addition to the existing x86), hopefully in time for the 2.6.25 > >>merge window. It is awkward to place the new arch support in > >>drivers/kvm/, so I'd like to propose the following new layout: > >> > >> virt/ top-level directory for hypervisors > >> virt/kvm/ kvm common code > >> virt/lguest/ the other hypervisor > >> arch/*/kvm/ arch dependent kvm code > >> > > > >The arch/*/dir shall use same dir-name as used > >in top-level directory. > > > > Well, it isn't like that now (arch/x86/oprofile, etc.) oprofile is now the best leader to follow in this respect. Just look at the utterly crap in their makefiles. > >So use arch/*/virt/kvm/ if kvm really requires > >a subdirectory of it own. Preferably not. > >A handful of files named kvm* does not warrant their own > >subdirectory IMO. > > > > > > We'll have 5-6 x86 specific files. > > Where do you suggest we place them? /arch/x86/virt/ Seems logical and fit the way we handle mm/ versus arch/*/mm, kernel/ arch/*/kernel etc. Are there any dependencies between the arch and non-arch files such as they are combined in a single module? Sam -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/