From: "Nicholas Piggin" <npiggin@gmail.com>
To: "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@linaro.org>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: <qemu-block@nongnu.org>, "Thomas Huth" <thuth@redhat.com>,
<qemu-s390x@nongnu.org>, <qemu-riscv@nongnu.org>,
<qemu-arm@nongnu.org>,
"Richard Henderson" <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
<qemu-ppc@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] bulk: Replace CONFIG_SOFTMMU by !CONFIG_USER_ONLY/CONFIG_SYSTEM_ONLY
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 16:41:31 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CTC62LQ76F2F.IT4OWO0UXG4F@wheely> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230613133347.82210-1-philmd@linaro.org>
On Tue Jun 13, 2023 at 11:33 PM AEST, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Missing review: 1, 7, 8
>
> Since v2:
> - Rebased
> - Added R-b tags
> - Rework i386_tr_init_disas_context() patch (Richard)
> - Dropped RFC prefix
>
> This series aims to clarify the CONFIG_[USER|SYSTEM] vs CONFIG_SOFTMMU
> confusion [*] by using explicit definitions, removing mentions of
> CONFIG_SOFTMMU in non-TCG code.
>
> We replace CONFIG_SOFTMMU by !CONFIG_USER_ONLY in C code and
> by CONFIG_SYSTEM_ONLY in meson config files.
I like the change in general, SOFTMMU does not read well (and is
not exactly correct for system code as pointed out).
Sorry for chiming in late and if I missed it, but was there
a reason not to define a complementary CONFIG_SYSTEM so system
code does not have to test !CONFIG_USER_ONLY and invert a bunch
of the tests?
Actually I thought you would have CONFIG_SYSTEM and CONFIG_USER
options and the _ONLY variants could be derivative for convenience,
but I'm probably missing some detail.
Thanks,
Nick
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-14 13:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-13 13:33 [PATCH v3 0/9] bulk: Replace CONFIG_SOFTMMU by !CONFIG_USER_ONLY/CONFIG_SYSTEM_ONLY Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-06-13 13:33 ` [PATCH v3 1/9] target/i386: Simplify i386_tr_init_disas_context() Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-06-14 5:15 ` Richard Henderson
2023-06-13 13:33 ` [PATCH v3 2/9] target/tricore: Remove pointless CONFIG_SOFTMMU guard Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-06-13 20:23 ` Bastian Koppelmann
2023-06-13 13:33 ` [PATCH v3 3/9] target/m68k: Check for USER_ONLY definition instead of SOFTMMU one Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-06-13 13:33 ` [PATCH v3 4/9] target/ppc: " Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-06-14 6:30 ` Nicholas Piggin
2023-06-13 13:33 ` [PATCH v3 5/9] hw/core/cpu: " Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-06-13 13:33 ` [PATCH v3 6/9] accel/tcg: " Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-06-13 13:33 ` [PATCH v3 7/9] meson: Alias CONFIG_SOFTMMU -> CONFIG_SYSTEM_ONLY Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-06-14 5:16 ` Richard Henderson
2023-06-13 13:33 ` [PATCH v3 8/9] meson: Replace " Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-06-14 5:17 ` Richard Henderson
2023-06-13 13:33 ` [PATCH v3 9/9] meson: Replace softmmu_ss -> system_ss Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2023-06-14 6:41 ` Nicholas Piggin [this message]
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=CTC62LQ76F2F.IT4OWO0UXG4F@wheely \
--to=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=philmd@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-arm@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-ppc@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-riscv@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
--cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/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.