From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43180) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfMLM-0004pS-Ss for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2017 04:27:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfMLI-0002A3-TW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2017 04:27:56 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53410) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfMLI-00029A-IK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2017 04:27:52 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:27:37 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20170809102737.18436fb4.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20170809071718.17924-1-cohuck@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] 9pfs: fix dependencies List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Thomas Huth Cc: aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, groug@kaod.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, agraf@suse.de, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:23:04 +0200 Thomas Huth wrote: > On 09.08.2017 09:17, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > Nothing in fsdev/ or hw/9pfs/ depends on pci; it should rather depend > > on CONFIG_VIRTFS and on the presence of an appropriate virtio transport > > device. > > > > Let's introduce CONFIG_VIRTIO_CCW to cover s390x and check for > > CONFIG_VIRTFS && (CONFIG_VIRTIO_PCI || CONFIG_VIRTIO_CCW). > > > > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck > > --- > > > > Changes v1->v2: drop extraneous spaces, fix build on cris > > > > --- > > default-configs/s390x-softmmu.mak | 1 + > > fsdev/Makefile.objs | 9 +++------ > > hw/Makefile.objs | 2 +- > > 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/default-configs/s390x-softmmu.mak b/default-configs/s390x-softmmu.mak > > index 51191b77df..e4c5236ceb 100644 > > --- a/default-configs/s390x-softmmu.mak > > +++ b/default-configs/s390x-softmmu.mak > > @@ -8,3 +8,4 @@ CONFIG_S390_FLIC=y > > CONFIG_S390_FLIC_KVM=$(CONFIG_KVM) > > CONFIG_VFIO_CCW=$(CONFIG_LINUX) > > CONFIG_WDT_DIAG288=y > > +CONFIG_VIRTIO_CCW=y > > diff --git a/fsdev/Makefile.objs b/fsdev/Makefile.objs > > index 659df6e187..3d157add31 100644 > > --- a/fsdev/Makefile.objs > > +++ b/fsdev/Makefile.objs > > @@ -1,10 +1,7 @@ > > -ifeq ($(CONFIG_VIRTIO)$(CONFIG_VIRTFS)$(CONFIG_PCI),yyy) > > # Lots of the fsdev/9pcode is pulled in by vl.c via qemu_fsdev_add. > > -# only pull in the actual virtio-9p device if we also enabled virtio. > > -common-obj-y = qemu-fsdev.o 9p-marshal.o 9p-iov-marshal.o > > -else > > -common-obj-y = qemu-fsdev-dummy.o > > -endif > > +# only pull in the actual virtio-9p device if we also enabled a virtio backend. > > +common-obj-$(call land,$(CONFIG_VIRTFS),$(call lor,$(CONFIG_VIRTIO_PCI),$(CONFIG_VIRTIO_CCW)))= qemu-fsdev.o 9p-marshal.o 9p-iov-marshal.o > > +common-obj-$(call lnot,$(call land,$(CONFIG_VIRTFS),$(call lor,$(CONFIG_VIRTIO_PCI),$(CONFIG_VIRTIO_CCW)))) = qemu-fsdev-dummy.o > > common-obj-y += qemu-fsdev-opts.o qemu-fsdev-throttle.o > > > > # Toplevel always builds this; targets without virtio will put it in > > diff --git a/hw/Makefile.objs b/hw/Makefile.objs > > index a2c61f6b09..335f26b65e 100644 > > --- a/hw/Makefile.objs > > +++ b/hw/Makefile.objs > > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > > -devices-dirs-$(call land, $(CONFIG_VIRTIO),$(call land,$(CONFIG_VIRTFS),$(CONFIG_PCI))) += 9pfs/ > > +devices-dirs-$(call land,$(CONFIG_VIRTFS),$(call lor,$(CONFIG_VIRTIO_PCI),$(CONFIG_VIRTIO_CCW))) += 9pfs/ > > devices-dirs-$(CONFIG_SOFTMMU) += acpi/ > > devices-dirs-$(CONFIG_SOFTMMU) += adc/ > > devices-dirs-$(CONFIG_SOFTMMU) += audio/ > > Patch should be fine now, I think... > > But thinking about this again, I wonder whether it would be enough to > simply check for CONFIG_VIRTIO=y here instead. CONFIG_VIRTIO=y should be > sufficient to assert that there is also at least one kind of virtio > transport available, right? > Otherwise this will look really horrible as soon as somebody also tries > to add support for virtio-mmio here later ;-) Do all virtio transports have support for 9p, though? I thought it was only virtio-pci and virtio-ccw...