On 6/20/23 20:01, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 at 21:23, Richard Henderson
wrote:
If CONFIG_USER_ONLY is ok generically, so is CONFIG_SOFTMMU,
because they are exactly opposite.
This isn't quite right. CONFIG_USER_ONLY is theoretically
something we should poison, because it's unsafe in the general
case to use it in compiled-once source files. But in practice
we make quite a lot of use of it in "we know this specific
use of it is OK" situations, like ifdeffing out function
prototypes. So we'd like to poison it, but we can't poison
it without a huge amoun of refactoring which isn't really
worth the effort.
Yes, a similar amount of refactoring would have been required within tcg/ to retain the
poison of CONFIG_SOFTMMU.
So it's not a good model for "therefore it's OK not to poison
CONFIG_SOFTMMU" -- we should leave that poisoned if we can,
so we don't introduce either new buggy uses of CONFIG_SOFTMMU,
or new "we know this is safe" uses of it which will make
it difficult to put it back into the poison-list later...
My plan is to remove it as a define entirely. But not this cycle.
r~
