On 03/31/2010 09:45 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 03/31/2010 05:45 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
While it probably make sense to achieve this goal, it doesn't mean it
should be done the dirty way.
For example it is known for a lot of time that the solution for the
bswap in the device code is to add a bus model doing the byteswapping.
Removing the #ifdef by deciding "this device will only be big/little
endian" doesn't seem to go in the right direction.
Yeah, I'm having real trouble with the KVM regression. I thought I
had it fixed but linux-user really made a mess of things. There's no
simple solution that doesn't require quite a bit of refactoring which
I'd rather do in a less ugly way. We've already been discussing
getting rid of all the kvm_enabled() stuff and I think doing that
properly is going to be needed to handle this correctly.
I'm thinking we should back out the vl.c changes and try to clean up
the KVM bits first. Does that sound reasonable blueswirl or can you
think of a cleaner way to deal with kvm?
And back out can just mean making vl.c compile per-target (along with
the thinko fix in acpi.c). That would be a nice temporary solution
until we worked out the kvm_enabled() bits correctly.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
