Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com> writes: > Hi, > >> By the way, we don't have a QEMUState but instead use globals. > > /me wants to underline this. > > IMO it is absolutely pointless to worry about ways to pass around > kvm_state. There never ever will be a serious need for that. > > We can stick with the current model of keeping global state in global > variables. And just do the same with kvm_state. > > Or we can move to have all state in a QEMUState struct which we'll > pass around basically everywhere. Then we can simply embed or > reference kvm_state there. > > I'd tend to stick with the global variables as I don't see the point > in having a QEMUstate. I doubt we'll ever see two virtual machines > driven by a single qemu process. YMMV.
/me grabs the fat magic marker and underlines some more.
