Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> writes: > On 09/30/2013 02:57 PM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: >> Alexander Graf<agraf@xxxxxxx> writes: >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/trace.h b/arch/powerpc/kvm/trace.h >>>>>> index a088e9a..7d5a136 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/trace.h >>>>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/trace.h >>>>>> @@ -85,6 +85,12 @@ TRACE_EVENT(kvm_ppc_instr, >>>>>> {41, "HV_PRIV"} >>>>>> #endif >>>>>> >>>>>> +#ifndef CONFIG_KVM_BOOK3S_PR >>>>>> +/* >>>>>> + * For pr we define this in trace_pr.h since it pr can be built as >>>>>> + * a module >>>>> Not sure I understand the need. If the config option is available, so >>>>> should the struct field. Worst case that happens with HV is that we >>>>> get empty shadow_srr1 values in our trace, no? >>>> That is not the real reason. trace.h get built as part of kvm.ko or as >>>> part of kernel. These trace functions actually get called from >>>> kvm-pr.ko. To make they build i would either need EXPORT_SYMBOL or move >>>> the definition of them to kvm-pr.ko. I did the later and moved only pr >>>> related traces to kvm-pr.ko >>> I fail to see why we wouldn't have a trace_hv.h file then, as that can >>> also be built as a module, no? And at that point I don't see why we >>> would need any conditionals at all in trace.h anymore, as it would >>> only cover generic code. >> Currently HV module is not using any tracepoints. Once it start using >> tracepoints we would have trace_hv.h > > So why would there be an #ifndef in trace.h? > to handle things like trace_kvm_exit in booke.c. For that we still don't have kernel module, and booke.c include trace.h. -aneesh -- 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