From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hollis Blanchard Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:24:26 -0600 Message-ID: <1226078666.9309.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20081107202541.85d6a823.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <1226076005.9309.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20081107120500.05cfb3a0@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from e3.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.143]:40929 "EHLO e3.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750816AbYKGRY2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:24:28 -0500 Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e3.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id mA7HOR5P015345 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:24:27 -0500 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (d01av02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.216]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id mA7HORNn147974 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:24:27 -0500 Received: from d01av02.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av02.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id mA7HOF4H011739 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:24:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20081107120500.05cfb3a0@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Josh Boyer Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Avi Kivity , linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 12:05 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:40:05 -0600 > Hollis Blanchard wrote: > > > > Hi Stephen, it looks like Josh accidentally set the following options in > > ppc44x_defconfig: > > +CONFIG_VIRTUALIZATION=y > > +CONFIG_KVM=y > > +CONFIG_KVM_BOOKE_HOST=y > > That wasn't an accident. I set them based on -rc2 Kconfig values, and > enabled it for better build coverage. Seems it worked. But when you asked me if I thought it was a good idea to enable KVM in ppc44x defconfig, I said "no"... I'm not sure if there's precedent for features marked EXPERIMENTAL to be in the defconfig, but simply put I have not done a thorough audit of the KVM 440 code for security or DoS issues. (For example, until yesterday, the guest could trivially flood the host console because I'd left a printk enabled.) It just seems like asking for trouble to enable it in the defconfig. That said, I have no complaint about having it enabled for linux-next builds. -- Hollis Blanchard IBM Linux Technology Center