Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] 9pfs: fix dependencies

[Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1243 bytes --]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 13:06:14 +0200
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 11:47:05 +0200
> Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:27:37 +0200
> > Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:23:04 +0200
> > > Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:  
> 
> > > > 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 ;-)      
> > >     
> > 
> > And virtio isn't the only transport for 9p: we also have a Xen backend,
> > which happen to be built because targets that support Xen also have
> > CONFIG_PCI I guess.  
> 
> Only if they also have virtio enabled, no?
> 

Yes, you're right. This is actually the case for i386 and x86_64 targets,
which seem to be the only that support Xen.

> Should the condition be VIRTFS && (VIRTIO || XEN), then?

That's what I was beginning to think as well :)

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]