qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 12:04:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190211120432.42373d08.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <746bc346-26ce-e096-d8a4-fe78bf7912c1@redhat.com>

On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 11:54:45 +0100
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 2019-02-11 11:48, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > 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 :)  
> 
> Since nobody currently has a need to completely disable PCI, I think we
> should go with option 2.

Hm... I'm wondering if we also should move S390_FEAT_ZPCI from the max
cpu model to the qemu cpu model (is there any reason not to turn it on
by default in tcg?)

  reply	other threads:[~2019-02-11 11:04 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
2019-02-11 10:54               ` Thomas Huth
2019-02-11 11:04                 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
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=20190211120432.42373d08.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).