On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 12:08:25AM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 02:13:45PM -0500, Robin Holt wrote: > > > diff --git a/mm/Kconfig b/mm/Kconfig > > > --- a/mm/Kconfig > > > +++ b/mm/Kconfig > > > @@ -205,3 +205,6 @@ config VIRT_TO_BUS > > > config VIRT_TO_BUS > > > def_bool y > > > depends on !ARCH_NO_VIRT_TO_BUS > > > + > > > +config MMU_NOTIFIER > > > + bool > > > > Without some text following the bool keyword, I am not even asked for > > this config setting on my ia64 build. > > Yes, this was explicitly asked by Andrew after his review. This is the > explanation pasted from the changelog. > > 3) It'd be a waste to add branches in the VM if nobody could possibly > run KVM/GRU/XPMEM on the kernel, so mmu notifiers will only enabled > if CONFIG_KVM=m/y. In the current kernel kvm won't yet take > advantage of mmu notifiers, but this already allows to compile a > KVM external module against a kernel with mmu notifiers enabled and > from the next pull from kvm.git we'll start using them. And > GRU/XPMEM will also be able to continue the development by enabling > KVM=m in their config, until they submit all GRU/XPMEM GPLv2 code > to the mainline kernel. Then they can also enable MMU_NOTIFIERS in > the same way KVM does it (even if KVM=n). This guarantees nobody > selects MMU_NOTIFIER=y if KVM and GRU and XPMEM are all =n.
Ah, so Andrew wants users of KVM to do a select of MMU_NOTIFIER. That makes sense. I will change (fix) my Kconfig changes. Thanks, Robin ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
