[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 02/34] tcg+qom: QOMify core CPU defintions

From: Peter Crosthwaite
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 02/34] tcg+qom: QOMify core CPU defintions
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 00:25:59 -0700

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 3:39 AM, Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 11/05/2015 12:36, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> > Right.  My point was that these functions are not polymorphic.  Each
>> > call to these should know exactly which function to call.
>> >
>> > cputlb.c, cpu-exec.c and parts of translate-all.c should be the moral
>> > equivalent of C++ templates.  I wouldn't mind switching to C++, but if
>> > we want to make them polymorphic we should do it at compile time through
>> > multiple compilation and/or inclusion from target-*.
>> I think we got more concrete than that, possibly on IRC only? I believe
>> #include'ing cputlb.c from some target-* file was one of your proposed
>> solutions?
> Yes (but Peter is making more functions virtual, so he'd have to do the
> same also for cpu-exec.c and parts of translate-all.c).
>> And splitting some of the inline functions that I was getting
>> rid of into some new (or existing?) file?
> If I remember correctly, another solution could be to keep the virtual
> functions, but ensure that all the hot paths were "devirtualizing" them
> and calling the CPU-specific function directly.

What does this mean exactly? Is there still a common code for cputlb.c
and friends?


> Paolo

reply via email to

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