From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L0huZ-0000Gd-Sw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:31:27 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L0huX-0000Fe-LO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:31:26 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34982 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L0huX-0000FV-Ci for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:31:25 -0500 Received: from yw-out-1718.google.com ([74.125.46.153]:61547) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L0huX-0006Lk-7H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:31:25 -0500 Received: by yw-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 6so447515ywa.82 for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:31:23 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <491C8087.7060302@codemonkey.ws> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:31:19 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1226594526-1855-1-git-send-email-markmc@redhat.com> <491C5F51.20205@siemens.com> In-Reply-To: <491C5F51.20205@siemens.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86: fix warning without CONFIG_KVM Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: Mark McLoughlin , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Jan Kiszka wrote: > Isn't it cleaner to provide an empty static inline in the !CONFIG_KVM > case? Not all compilers might be smart enough to optimize this function > away. > kvm_enabled() is (0) when !CONFIG_KVM so that's why this is a warning and not an error. The function call disappears during linking from dead code elimination. There is no routine overhead when !CONFIG_KVM. Regards, Anthony Liguori > Jan > >