[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180824141045.GO24124@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:10:45 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
x86@...nel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
akataria@...are.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, hpa@...or.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] x86/paravirt: move the Xen-only pv_irq_ops
under the PARAVIRT_XXL umbrella
On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 09:37:37AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> Some of the paravirt ops defined in pv_irq_ops are for Xen PV guests
> only. Define them only if CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL is set.
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h
> index e652ec27d945..ae53ee36d8fb 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h
> @@ -197,8 +197,10 @@ struct pv_irq_ops {
> struct paravirt_callee_save irq_disable;
> struct paravirt_callee_save irq_enable;
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL
> void (*safe_halt)(void);
> void (*halt)(void);
> +#endif
that makes me sad... but it appears VSMP also uses them. Can't you
simply make VSMP also select XXL, I don't think that's used quite as
much as Xen is :-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists