On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 12:13:47PM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 25.10.2019 um 18:04 hat Stefan Hajnoczi geschrieben:
> > From: Aarushi Mehta <mehta.aar...@gmail.com>
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Aarushi Mehta <mehta.aar...@gmail.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@redhat.com>
> This commit message needs to answer at least where these stubs are
> actually used. Aren't all callers protected with #ifdef
> CONFIG_LINUX_IO_URING? (And if they aren't, why is abort() okay?)

Okay, I'll clarify in the commit description.

I didn't find a program that actually requires these stubs today, but in
theory they are required when:
1. A program links against util-obj-y but not block-obj-y (e.g.
2. It uses util/async.o, which depends on luring_*() APIs

You can test this by adding a call to qemu_bh_new() into
vhost-user-gpu's main.c:

  ld: libqemuutil.a(async.o): in function `aio_ctx_finalize':
  qemu/util/async.c:281: undefined reference to `luring_detach_aio_context'
  ld: /home/stefanha/qemu/util/async.c:282: undefined reference to 
  ld: libqemuutil.a(async.o): in function `aio_setup_linux_io_uring':
  qemu/util/async.c:358: undefined reference to `luring_init'
  ld: /home/stefanha/qemu/util/async.c:363: undefined reference to 

The program may have no intention of using io_uring, just the QEMU main
loop and BH, so there is an argument for avoiding linking block-obj-y*.
That's the purpose of the stubs and why abort() is okay.

* It's possible to argue against this and personally I'm not that
convinced by stubs for this scenario.  But io_uring.o should be
consistent with how things work today with linux-aio.o.  If you feel
strongly against having stubs then the linux-aio.o stubs should also be
removed (see commit c2b38b277a788).


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to