Avi Kivity wrote: > Christian Ehrhardt wrote: >> Hollis and I discussed how to continue on that. >> Atm the upstream code is broken for powerpc and your response is too >> vague for me to extend our patch in some way. >> So which way should we go? Will you apply (or should I resubmit ?) >> Hollis patch for now to fix upstream for powerpc. And we/you extend >> it later or what else would you prefer? > > My thinking is that we convert CONFIG_* to __i386__, __x86_64__, > __powerpc__, and the like, using the hack-modules pass in 'make sync'. > > The advantages of that are: > > - 'make sync' headers are architecture independent. Currently once > you run 'make sync', the headers become tied to the arch, even the > ones in include/linux > - The headers are standalone -- no need for -DCONFIG_* in anything > that includes it > - We already mangle things, so it's not a big change > > I think Xiantao was going to try it, but if not, then please do it > yourself. I could too, of course, but I prefer someone that can test > on non-x86 do it. Okay, I will try it out, and send to you to have the test on non-ia64 platforms. Thanks Xiantao-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
