All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
To: "Eduardo Habkost" <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>,
	Jiri Denemark <jdenemar@redhat.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/7 v2] target-i386: Eliminate CONFIG_KVM #ifdefs
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 17:36:10 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52A7C18A.8080400@twiddle.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131210185506.GF27737@otherpad.lan.raisama.net>

On 12/10/2013 10:55 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> The compiler is capable of eliminating the KVM-specific function calls
> as long as the calling function has an assert(kvm_enabled()) line, so we
> don't need to wrap all KVM-specific code inside #ifdefs.

Really?  In tcg/tcg.h we force NDEBUG if not CONFIG_TCG_DEBUG, which makes
assert expand to nothing.  This statement may be true for some files, but
almost everything under target-i386 includes tcg.h.

Although I know we've talked within glibc and gcc the de-optimization of
missing out on assert info, and how we ought to use __builtin_gcc_unreachable
in order to retain that, we've still not done anything official with <assert.h>.

That said, I don't disagree with the changes, if they work with a forced
-DNDEBUG, i.e. unreachable code that still compiles.


r~

  reply	other threads:[~2013-12-11  1:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-27 19:34 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] x86 CPU subclasses, take 6 Eduardo Habkost
2013-11-27 19:34 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/7] target-i386: Eliminate CONFIG_KVM #ifdefs Eduardo Habkost
2013-12-09 18:17   ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-12-10 18:55   ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/7 v2] " Eduardo Habkost
2013-12-11  1:36     ` Richard Henderson [this message]
2013-12-11 16:11       ` Eduardo Habkost
2013-12-11 16:31     ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/7 v3] " Eduardo Habkost
2013-11-27 19:34 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/7] target-i386: Don't change x86_def_t struct on cpu_x86_register() Eduardo Habkost
2013-11-27 19:34 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/7] target-i386: Move KVM default-vendor hack to instance_init Eduardo Habkost
2013-11-27 19:34 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/7] target-i386: Rename cpu_x86_register() to x86_cpu_load_def() Eduardo Habkost
2013-11-27 19:34 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/7] target-i386: Call x86_cpu_load_def() earlier Eduardo Habkost
2013-11-27 19:34 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/7] target-i386: Rename x86_def_t to X86CPUDefinition Eduardo Habkost
2013-11-27 19:34 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC 7/7] target-i386: CPU model subclasses Eduardo Habkost
2013-12-09 18:07 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] x86 CPU subclasses, take 6 Eduardo Habkost
2013-12-09 18:21   ` Paolo Bonzini

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=52A7C18A.8080400@twiddle.net \
    --to=rth@twiddle.net \
    --cc=afaerber@suse.de \
    --cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
    --cc=imammedo@redhat.com \
    --cc=jdenemar@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.