From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] Weight-balanced tree Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 19:08:45 +0200 Message-ID: <4D653F1D.2090106@redhat.com> References: <20110222183822.22026.62832.stgit@s20.home> <20110222185456.22026.28200.stgit@s20.home> <4D6506FB.2090809@redhat.com> <1298480563.18387.6.camel@x201> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, mtosatti@redhat.com, xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com, Andrew Morton To: Alex Williamson Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1298480563.18387.6.camel@x201> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 02/23/2011 07:02 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_WEIGHT_BALANCED_TREE) += wbtree.o > > > > then kvm can select it, and the impact on non-kvm kernels is removed. > > Then we'd have issues trying to build an external kvm module for a > pre-existing non-kvm kernel. Do we care? Officially, no. What we typically do in these cases is copy the code into the kvm-kmod compatibility layer and compile it if the kernel doesn't supply it (like all older kernels regardless of config). > If we were to take such a > path, I think the default should be on, kvm would depend on it, but we > could add an option to disable it for EMBEDDED/EXPERT. Thanks, That would work as well. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function