From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fix compilation with kvm disabled Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:20:02 +0300 Message-ID: <4A548EF2.10303@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> <20090708121321.GC12440@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Glauber Costa , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:34261 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753935AbZGHMRc (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jul 2009 08:17:32 -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 n68CHW6N011511 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2009 08:17:32 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090708121321.GC12440@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/08/2009 03:13 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> 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. > Discussion yes, conclusion no. >>> 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 People who debug (though -O1 works fine most of the time). It also feels unclean to rely on optimization for correctness. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function