On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 6:02 PM Jürgen Groß <jgr...@suse.com> wrote:
> On 05.05.20 17:01, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 4:34 PM Jürgen Groß <jgr...@suse.com> wrote:
> >> On 05.05.20 16:15, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > I considered that as well, and don't really mind either way. I think it does
> > get a bit ugly whatever we do. If you prefer the union, I can respin the
> > patch that way.
>
> Hmm, thinking more about it I think the real clean solution would be to
> extend struct map_ring_valloc_hvm to cover the pv case, too, to add the
> map and unmap arrays (possibly as a union) to it and to allocate it
> dynamically instead of having it on the stack.
>
> Would you be fine doing this?
This is a little more complex than I'd want to do without doing any testing
(and no, I don't want to do the testing either) ;-)
It does sound like a better approach though.
Arnd
