Re: [PATCH] kvm: ppc: fix Kconfig constraints

[Sam Ravnborg <sam-uyr5N9Q2VtJg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>]

On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 12:05:02PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Hollis Blanchard wrote:
> >kvm: ppc: fix Kconfig constraints
> >
> >Make sure that CONFIG_KVM cannot be selected without processor support
> >(currently, 440 is the only processor implementation available).
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Hollis Blanchard <hollisb-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> >
> >diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/kvm/Kconfig
> >--- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/Kconfig
> >+++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/Kconfig
> >@@ -15,24 +15,22 @@ if VIRTUALIZATION
> > if VIRTUALIZATION
> > 
> > config KVM
> >-	bool "Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM) support"
> >-	depends on EXPERIMENTAL
> >+	bool
> > 	select PREEMPT_NOTIFIERS
> > 	select ANON_INODES
> >+
> >+config KVM_440
> >+	bool "KVM support for PowerPC 440 processors"
> >+	depends on EXPERIMENTAL && 44x
> >+	select KVM
> >  
> 
> I have a vague memory that 'select' will not propagate (what's the word? 
> transitive?) - -that is, the 'select KVM' will enable KVM but will not 
> cause ANON_INODES and PREEMPT_NOTIFIERS to be set.
I'm glad to say your memory in this case is wrong.

Select works recursively so the usage above is OK.

If KVM had a dependency such as EXPERIMENTAL then
select would enable KVM no matter the value of EXPERIMENTAL.

	Sam
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html