>>> On 02.06.17 at 09:31, <julien.gr...@arm.com> wrote: > On 06/02/2017 08:10 AM, Lan Tianyu wrote: >> On 2017年05月30日 23:42, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 30.05.17 at 17:36,<wei.l...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 01:34:31AM -0400, Lan Tianyu wrote: >>>>> --- a/xen/common/Kconfig >>>>> +++ b/xen/common/Kconfig >>>>> @@ -73,6 +73,17 @@ config TMEM >>>>> >>>>> If unsure, say Y. >>>>> >>>>> +config VIOMMU >>>>> + def_bool y >>>>> + prompt "Xen vIOMMU Support" if EXPERT = "y" >>>>> + depends on X86 >>>>> + ---help--- >>>>> + Virtual IOMMU provides interrupt remapping function for guest and >>>>> + it allows guest to boot up more than 255 vcpus which requires interrupt >>>>> + remapping function. >>>>> + >>>>> + If unsure, say Y. >>>> Indentation. And this should be disabled by default. >>> It's actually a question whether in our current scheme a Kconfig >>> option is appropriate here in the first place. I'd rather see this be >>> an always built feature which needs enabling on the command line >>> for the time being. >> >> In the RFC V1, we made vIOMMU always built-in feature. But >> ARM or other arches doesn't have vIOMMU support. >> >> Julien suggested to introduce a new Kconfig and only built vIOMMU on >> x86. Both two ways won't affect vIOMMU function. >> >> https://www.mail-archive.com/xen-devel@lists.xen.org/msg101421.html >> >> Jan & Julien, we need to make a choice here > We should definitely not compiled in code that are not used for an > architecture. This would be dead code or potential bug if not disabled > correctly.
I agree, but imo this should be a prompt-less Kconfig option, selected under suitable conditions. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
