Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] vhost: fix features ack

[Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>]

On 03/31/2010 09:45 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 05:45 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> While it probably make sense to achieve this goal, it doesn't mean it
>> should be done the dirty way.
>>
>> For example it is known for a lot of time that the solution for the
>> bswap in the device code is to add a bus model doing the byteswapping.
>> Removing the #ifdef by deciding "this device will only be big/little
>> endian" doesn't seem to go in the right direction.
>
> Yeah, I'm having real trouble with the KVM regression.  I thought I 
> had it fixed but linux-user really made a mess of things.  There's no 
> simple solution that doesn't require quite a bit of refactoring which 
> I'd rather do in a less ugly way.  We've already been discussing 
> getting rid of all the kvm_enabled() stuff and I think doing that 
> properly is going to be needed to handle this correctly.
>
> I'm thinking we should back out the vl.c changes and try to clean up 
> the KVM bits first.  Does that sound reasonable blueswirl or can you 
> think of a cleaner way to deal with kvm?

And back out can just mean making vl.c compile per-target (along with 
the thinko fix in acpi.c).  That would be a nice temporary solution 
until we worked out the kvm_enabled() bits correctly.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Regards,
>
> Anthony Liguori
>