From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D2E7C433F5 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 16:20:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97266411BA; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:20:04 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Authentication-Results: mm01.cs.columbia.edu (amavisd-new); dkim=softfail (fail, message has been altered) header.i=@google.com Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qepyZfvxvpo5; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:20:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D05A49F0C; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:20:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 090FD49EE2 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:20:02 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zBrVMkMzTqwU for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:20:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail-pj1-f49.google.com (mail-pj1-f49.google.com [209.85.216.49]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 700D0411BA for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:20:00 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pj1-f49.google.com with SMTP id v4so8546715pjh.2 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 08:20:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=nYPHl8dMIoFQJMeCg2hKGumzp/ft6Ah/5yUNeWO6Yuk=; b=Y+98Mn0k9Y4v5fP2XlMkV7VUllvqZMH6r75Ele8HG0lwKDSLpw93pyGD2jvCKXEhx4 r/c0TNEvuYZiPQr5+hcFENrz+zuykRqvW8/Bn3kkVN2oX/v3g+WL/O+BFaZqiPUONxpU WNHMbQ+cewH98XHiTnddVg8QD8XAiE39WXdq96oNUOALzHWshbGxt1G4pIxsdZtvkmzZ gvp8vpmJRvu7sF2XJYvYhDxOqIPYOxxiW8+OVR8tbbZaQfnEttD6jjwvrS1dVyd1lDy4 PK1fq62BQdSPMUJVgAX74mq8HoUGexfHrT3JhHVodyyiQun4yb3e3KheDvDFOchT7Pgr pQ1g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=nYPHl8dMIoFQJMeCg2hKGumzp/ft6Ah/5yUNeWO6Yuk=; b=gKNgbG+a0UjqlQsrJZHv52XwlcT4aO5+GCgKN2NOI9SxRF9Xd5tZAJNW/TvxquXb0E 5AIyd2iNyxUi8oKCeSoIpwhGErwKMi6oValpv78TmDqM892Lcw213O+sMWpy8rThjgLx cQVjHmolZrerF3g6Y1gxUsanyEYm+oVUprC0tc+llkGm/iEPiVHFqRY38aOpBUbiriDH LPKcDhH6G8Y0MoLYnRPGJVUnQpbW2hCcSkxb7ldjz2+bWXa5eIYSEXv8372mQ3TQc4j7 VsiuxnRgxtkV7TeGkxY6wS+m+cw4w8qz7SERRjFJw9N3D00108cQRLiZSLGVqXT+o3aW nVCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533mIk02bxnB5ddXB4Fe9x6abrF7Cu8uoh5CpSdZR8gPffvZkRBU N+scISvcRA+NrK0no38rcZd5SQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxKLUlNFffoMbGq0cVYW6M/KUZ85oWXF/q9TTbCO0SlemFdL/UaiyRqxIcvu8L3rGQKk0XMZw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9346:: with SMTP id g6mr2363751plp.156.1644596399289; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 08:19:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com (157.214.185.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.185.214.157]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 3sm5448066pjk.29.2022.02.11.08.19.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 11 Feb 2022 08:19:58 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 16:19:55 +0000 From: Sean Christopherson To: Thomas Huth Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 0/4] configure changes and rename --target-efi Message-ID: References: <20220210150943.1280146-1-alexandru.elisei@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: Zixuan Wang , kvm list , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Paolo Bonzini , Varad Gautam X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu On Fri, Feb 11, 2022, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 10/02/2022 20.48, Zixuan Wang wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 11:36 AM Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 10, 2022, Zixuan Wang wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 11:05 AM Alexandru Elisei > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 05:25:46PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 10, 2022, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > > > > > > > I renamed --target-efi to --efi-payload in the last patch because I felt it > > > > > > > looked rather confusing to do ./configure --target=qemu --target-efi when > > > > > > > configuring the tests. If the rename is not acceptable, I can think of a > > > > > > > few other options: > > > > > > > > > > > > I find --target-efi to be odd irrespective of this new conflict. A simple --efi > > > > > > seems like it would be sufficient. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Rename --target to --vmm. That was actually the original name for the > > > > > > > option, but I changed it because I thought --target was more generic and > > > > > > > that --target=efi would be the way going forward to compile kvm-unit-tests > > > > > > > to run as an EFI payload. I realize now that separating the VMM from > > > > > > > compiling kvm-unit-tests to run as an EFI payload is better, as there can > > > > > > > be multiple VMMs that can run UEFI in a VM. Not many people use kvmtool as > > > > > > > a test runner, so I think the impact on users should be minimal. > > > > > > > > > > > > Again irrespective of --target-efi, I think --target for the VMM is a potentially > > > > > > confusing name. Target Triplet[*] and --target have specific meaning for the > > > > > > compiler, usurping that for something similar but slightly different is odd. > > > > > > > > > > Wouldn't that mean that --target-efi is equally confusing? Do you have > > > > > suggestions for other names? > > > > > > > > How about --config-efi for configure, and CONFIG_EFI for source code? > > > > I thought about this name when I was developing the initial patch, and > > > > Varad also proposed similar names in his initial patch series [1]: > > > > --efi and CONFIG_EFI. > > > > > > I don't mind CONFIG_EFI for the source, that provides a nice hint that it's a > > > configure option and is familiar for kernel developers. But for the actually > > > option, why require more typing? I really don't see any benefit of --config-efi > > > over --efi. > > > > I agree, --efi looks better than --target-efi or --config-efi. > > > Or maybe --enable-efi ... since configure scripts normally take > "--enable-..." or "--disable-..." parameters for stuff like this? > I don't hate it :-) It'll also future-proof things if we ever make UEFI the default for x86. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm