Re: [PATCH] kvm: ppc: detect old headers

Re: [PATCH] kvm: ppc: detect old headers

[Alexander Graf]

On 03.05.2011, at 14:31, Jan Kiszka wrote:

> On 2011-05-03 14:28, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> 
>> On 03.05.2011, at 14:14, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2011-05-03 13:54, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>> When compiling Qemu with older kernel headers, the PVR setting
>>>> mechanism isn't available yet. Unfortunately, back then I didn't add
>>>> a capability we could check against, so all we can do is add a configure
>>>> test to see if we support PVR setting. For BookE, we don't care yet.
>>>> 
>>>> This fixes compilation errors with KVM enabled on older kernel headers
>>>> (like 2.6.32).
>>> 
>>> Why not finally import the latest kvm kernel headers into qemu? Would
>>> save us a lot of current and future configure and #ifdef dances.
>> 
>> Sure, sounds like a good topic for today's call?
> 
> Fine with me. Patch should be done by then as well.

*shrug* I'm fairly indifferent on that topic. It would help users, so they can easier compile things, but requires us to keep the headers in sync. Do you have any good way of automating the process?


Alex

Re: [PATCH] kvm: ppc: detect old headers

[Jan Kiszka]

On 2011-05-03 14:33, Alexander Graf wrote:
> 
> On 03.05.2011, at 14:31, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> 
>> On 2011-05-03 14:28, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03.05.2011, at 14:14, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2011-05-03 13:54, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>>> When compiling Qemu with older kernel headers, the PVR setting
>>>>> mechanism isn't available yet. Unfortunately, back then I didn't add
>>>>> a capability we could check against, so all we can do is add a configure
>>>>> test to see if we support PVR setting. For BookE, we don't care yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> This fixes compilation errors with KVM enabled on older kernel headers
>>>>> (like 2.6.32).
>>>>
>>>> Why not finally import the latest kvm kernel headers into qemu? Would
>>>> save us a lot of current and future configure and #ifdef dances.
>>>
>>> Sure, sounds like a good topic for today's call?
>>
>> Fine with me. Patch should be done by then as well.
> 
> *shrug* I'm fairly indifferent on that topic. It would help users, so they can easier compile things, but requires us to keep the headers in sync. Do you have any good way of automating the process?

There will be a 'make update-kvm-headers' target, imported from
kvm-kmod. Can be run against some recent kernel, and the result will
just have to be committed & posted.

Moreover, I will drop alternative ways of pulling in headers (except via
CFLAGS overwriting). That will typically bite the patch submitter who
requires a header update and make her/him submit latest headers as well.
So far at least for the theory.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux