From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: fix build after c/s 25477:e12e0b038219
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 14:53:12 +0100
Message-ID: <CC122058.44500%keir@xen.org>
References: <4FEC7460020000780008C821@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <4FEC7460020000780008C821@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 28/06/2012 14:12, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:

>>>> On 28.06.12 at 15:03, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org> wrote:
>> On 25/06/2012 11:54, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Only x86 currently has a struct vcpu field arch.gdbsx_vcpu_event. But
>>> as the whole function domain_pause_for_debugger() is pointless to be
>>> compiled when there's no arch support, simply introduce another HAS_*
>>> macro, enabled only on x86.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>> 
>> How did arch/arm build at all then, previously, with this function present
>> for a long time in common code?
> 
> Prior to said c/s adding a reference to ->arch.gdbsx_vcpu_event,
> the function wasn't arch-specific at all.

Ah yes, of course. :)

>> Would a better fix be just to move the
>> function to arch/x86/domain.c, since it is only called by arch/x86?
> 
> I'd say no - the function really ought to be generic. Any arch
> wanting gdbsx support would have to add a respective field to
> its arch_vcpu. Or alternatively the field itself should get moved
> into struct vcpu, perhaps dependent upon some CONFIG_*.
> (This is also why I didn't want to put in e.g. a CONFIG_X86
> conditional, which would have been a smaller change.)

Well, fine then.

Acked-by: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>

> Jan
> 
>>> --- a/xen/Rules.mk
>>> +++ b/xen/Rules.mk
>>> @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ CFLAGS-$(perfc)         += -DPERF_COUNTE
>>>  CFLAGS-$(perfc_arrays)  += -DPERF_ARRAYS
>>>  CFLAGS-$(lock_profile)  += -DLOCK_PROFILE
>>>  CFLAGS-$(HAS_ACPI)      += -DHAS_ACPI
>>> +CFLAGS-$(HAS_GDBSX)     += -DHAS_GDBSX
>>>  CFLAGS-$(HAS_PASSTHROUGH) += -DHAS_PASSTHROUGH
>>>  CFLAGS-$(frame_pointer) += -fno-omit-frame-pointer -DCONFIG_FRAME_POINTER
>>>  
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/Rules.mk
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/Rules.mk
>>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ HAS_PASSTHROUGH := y
>>>  HAS_NS16550 := y
>>>  HAS_EHCI := y
>>>  HAS_KEXEC := y
>>> +HAS_GDBSX := y
>>>  xenoprof := y
>>>  
>>>  #
>>> --- a/xen/common/domain.c
>>> +++ b/xen/common/domain.c
>>> @@ -612,6 +612,7 @@ void vcpu_end_shutdown_deferral(struct v
>>>          vcpu_check_shutdown(v);
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> +#ifdef HAS_GDBSX
>>>  void domain_pause_for_debugger(void)
>>>  {
>>>      struct domain *d = current->domain;
>>> @@ -628,6 +629,7 @@ void domain_pause_for_debugger(void)
>>>      if (current->arch.gdbsx_vcpu_event == 0)
>>>          send_global_virq(VIRQ_DEBUGGER);
>>>  }
>>> +#endif
>>>  
>>>  /* Complete domain destroy after RCU readers are not holding old
>> references.
>>> */
>>>  static void complete_domain_destroy(struct rcu_head *head)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Xen-devel mailing list
>>> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
>>> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
> 
> 
>