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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
