----- Original Message -----
On 01/10/2012 05:44 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
quoted
On Mon, 9 Jan 2012, Andrew Jones wrote:
quoted
I guess if we did the s/XEN_DOM0/LOCAL_APIC && IO_APIC && ACPI/ in
arch/x86/pci/xen.c it would be pretty easy to review for
equivalence.
Then keep CONFIG_PRIVILIGED, but drop XEN_DOM0 from everywhere
else and
compile in the 3 files. I don't think it makes much sense to do it
though. XEN_DOM0 keeps things tidier now and might be useful
later.
we can keep things clean with the following:
#ifdef CONFIG_LOCAL_APIC && CONFIG_IO_APIC && CONFIG_ACPI &&
CONFIG_PCI_XEN
#define XEN_DOM0
#endif
in include/xen/xen.h.
So in the source files we can still '#ifdef XEN_DOM0', but at the
same
time we can get rid of the build symbol: everybody wins.
No, really, I think this is silly. This kind of dependency
information
should be encoded in the Kconfig system, and not reimplemented in an
ad-hoc way.
If there were a clean way to do what Andrew wants then I'd support
it,
but this thread has descended into a spiral of madness, which makes
me
think its a lost cause.
If the root complaint is that "customers think that anything set in
.config is a supported feature", then the solutions are to support
all
the features in .config, re-educate the customers that they're wrong,
or
maintain a local patch to do this stuff.
If only re-educating people was free, like preempting questions is.
Local patches are of course always an option, and perhaps in this
case it's the best one. However, I think we already made a case for
better xen configurability for the driver domains, so I'm not 100%
convinced my initial patch (making dom0 configurable) isn't worthy
of upstream. Also, I didn't see any comments on my v2[*] of that
patch, which I believe satisfies the menu complexity issue and
brings in more configurability. That said, I'm about to reply to
that patch myself, since there's an issue with it.
Drew
[*] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.virtualization/14635