From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fix compilation with kvm disabled Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 15:13:23 +0300 Message-ID: <20090708121321.GC12440@redhat.com> References: <1246991791-21741-1-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com> <1246991791-21741-2-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com> <1246991791-21741-3-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com> <20090708075913.GA12440@redhat.com> <4A548D01.2050600@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Glauber Costa , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:45681 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754104AbZGHMOE (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jul 2009 08:14:04 -0400 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n68CE3XV010308 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 08:14:03 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A548D01.2050600@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 03:11:45PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 07/08/2009 10:59 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> >>> @@ -337,10 +346,12 @@ int msix_init(struct PCIDevice *dev, unsigned short nentries, >>> if (nentries> MSIX_MAX_ENTRIES) >>> return -EINVAL; >>> >>> +#ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQCHIP >>> if (kvm_enabled()&& qemu_kvm_irqchip_in_kernel()) { >>> dev->msix_irq_entries = qemu_malloc(nentries * >>> sizeof *dev->msix_irq_entries); >>> } >>> +#endif >>> dev->msix_entry_used = qemu_mallocz(MSIX_MAX_ENTRIES * >>> sizeof *dev->msix_entry_used); >>> >>> @@ -454,10 +465,13 @@ void msix_notify(PCIDevice *dev, unsigned vector) >>> msix_set_pending(dev, vector); >>> return; >>> } >>> + >>> +#ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQCHIP >>> if (kvm_enabled()&& qemu_kvm_irqchip_in_kernel()) { >>> kvm_set_irq(dev->msix_irq_entries[vector].gsi, 1, NULL); >>> return; >>> } >>> +#endif >>> >>> address = pci_get_long(table_entry + MSIX_MSG_UPPER_ADDR); >>> address = (address<< 32) | pci_get_long(table_entry + MSIX_MSG_ADDR); >>> >> >> I think it's time we stopped worrying about builds against old kernel >> headers or without them. What do we gain from it? >> > > qemu upstream doesn't carry its own headers, so it we want to merge, we > need to work against old headers. Was there ever discussion on this? I think the right thing to do is to add own headers to qemu upstream. >> I believe that the right thing to do is to define kvm_enabled as a macro >> returning 0, and let compiler optimize the code out. >> > > Doesn't work with -O0 (or if it does, we can't count on it). With -O0 you get a ton of dead code anyway. Who cares? -- MST