From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, Collin Walling <walling@linux.ibm.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw/s390x: Fix the function arguments in the pci stub file
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 11:48:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190211114859.76109aa3.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190201092356.295925c2.cohuck@redhat.com>
On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 09:23:56 +0100
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 07:46:40 +0100
> Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:
> > So I see two options now:
> >
> > 1) Finally really make the device optional, at least for new machine
> > types, so we can really disable CONFIG_PCI and get a working executable.
> >
> > 2) Scratch the idea completely to make this optional, always link the
> > s390-pci-bus.o and s390-pci-inst.o files unconditionally, and remove the
> > s390-pci-stub.c file.
> >
> > I assume options 2 is preferred, since we likely rather want to move
> > into the PCI direction in the long run, instead of ignoring it...
>
> I think both options are viable, but option 1 is of course more work.
> The win there is that we could disable an entire subsystem.
>
> I guess that the basic questions are: How important is it that
> subsystems can be compiled out, and do we see a use case for a pci-less
> s390 machine in the future? We really don't want to spend much time on
> something of dubious use...
Any thoughts on this?
I'm currently tending towards option 2 (and can cook up a patch for
that). Unless someone is already working on option 1 :)
Of course, I can also apply the original patch, but the end result is
not very useful...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-11 10:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-31 17:47 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw/s390x: Fix the function arguments in the pci stub file Thomas Huth
2019-01-31 17:56 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-01-31 18:00 ` Thomas Huth
2019-01-31 18:08 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-02-01 6:14 ` Thomas Huth
2019-02-01 6:46 ` Thomas Huth
2019-02-01 8:23 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-02-11 10:48 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2019-02-11 10:54 ` Thomas Huth
2019-02-11 11:04 ` Cornelia Huck
2019-02-11 11:17 ` Thomas Huth
2019-02-11 11:20 ` Cornelia Huck
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190211114859.76109aa3.cohuck@redhat.com \
--to=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
--cc=walling@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).