On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 09:49:06AM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote: > On Wed, Sep 06, 2023 at 12:23:19PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > > On 6/9/23 11:16, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote: > > > This file is not needed for some time now. All the stubs implemented in > > > it (kvm_riscv_reset_vcpu() and kvm_riscv_set_irq()) are wrapped in 'if > > > kvm_enabled()' blocks that the compiler will rip it out in non-KVM > > > builds. > > > > > > We'll also add non-KVM stubs for all functions declared in kvm_riscv.h. > > > All stubs are implemented as g_asserted_not_reached(), meaning that we > > > won't support them in non-KVM builds. This is done by other kvm headers > > > like kvm_arm.h and kvm_ppc.h. > > > > Aren't them also protected by kvm_enabled()? Otherwise shouldn't they? > > Yes, I think your earlier suggestion that we always invoke kvm functions > from non-kvm files with a kvm_enabled() guard makes sense. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarb...@ventanamicro.com> > > > --- > > > target/riscv/kvm-stub.c | 30 ------------------------------ > > > target/riscv/kvm_riscv.h | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > target/riscv/meson.build | 2 +- > > > 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) > > > delete mode 100644 target/riscv/kvm-stub.c > > > > > > > diff --git a/target/riscv/kvm_riscv.h b/target/riscv/kvm_riscv.h > > > index f6501e68e2..c9ecd9a967 100644 > > > --- a/target/riscv/kvm_riscv.h > > > +++ b/target/riscv/kvm_riscv.h > > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ > > > #ifndef QEMU_KVM_RISCV_H > > > #define QEMU_KVM_RISCV_H > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM > > > void kvm_riscv_cpu_add_kvm_properties(Object *obj); > > > > At a glance kvm_riscv_cpu_add_kvm_properties() is. > > Keep the prototype declared (before #ifdef CONFIG_KVM) is enough for the > > compiler to elide it. > > Yes, when building without CONFIG_KVM enabled it's actually better to not > have the stubs, since the compiler will catch an unguarded kvm function > call (assuming the kvm function is defined in a file which is only built > with CONFIG_KVM). > > Unfortunately we don't have anything to protect developers from forgetting > the kvm_enabled() guard when building a QEMU which supports both TCG and > KVM. We could try to remember to put 'assert(kvm_enabled())' at the start > of each of these types of functions. It looks like mips does that for a > couple functions.
Eh, ignore this suggestion. We don't need asserts, because we have CI. As long as our CI does a CONFIG_KVM=n build and all KVM functions are in kvm- only files, then we'll always catch calls of KVM functions which are missing their kvm_enabled() guards. Thanks, drew