On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 19:17 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 02.10.2013, at 19:04, Scott Wood wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 18:53 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >> On 02.10.2013, at 18:40, Scott Wood wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 16:19 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>>> Won't this break when CONFIG_EPAPR_PARAVIRT=n? We wouldn't have 
> >>>> epapr_hcalls.S compiled into the code base then and the bl above would 
> >>>> reference an unknown function.
> >>> 
> >>> KVM_GUEST selects EPAPR_PARAVIRT.
> >> 
> >> But you can not select KVM_GUEST and still call these inline functions, no?
> > 
> > No.
> > 
> >> Like kvm_arch_para_features().
> > 
> > Where does that get called without KVM_GUEST?
> > 
> > How would that work currently, with the call to kvm_hypercall() in
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/kvm.c (which calls epapr_hypercall, BTW)?
> 
> It wouldn't ever get called because kvm_hypercall() ends up always returning 
> EV_UNIMPLEMENTED when #ifndef CONFIG_KVM_GUEST.

OK, so the objection is to removing that stub?  Where would we actually
want to call this without knowing that KVM_GUEST or EPAPR_PARAVIRT are
enabled?

-SCott



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to