On 18.08.2025 15:28, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> On 8/18/25 10:31 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 15.08.2025 12:27, Penny Zheng wrote:
>>> In order to fix CI error of a randconfig picking both PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE=y 
>>> and
>>> HVM=y results in hvm.c being built, but domctl.c not being built, which 
>>> leaves
>>> a few functions, like domctl_lock_acquire/release() undefined, causing 
>>> linking
>>> to fail.
>>> To fix that, we intend to move domctl.o out of the PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE 
>>> Makefile
>>> /hypercall-defs section, with this adjustment, we also need to release
>>> redundant vnuma_destroy() stub definition from PV_SHIM_EXCLUSIVE guardian,
>>> to not break compilation
>>> Above change will leave dead code in the shim binary temporarily and will be
>>> fixed with the introduction of domctl-op wrapping.
>> Well, "temporarily" is now getting interesting. While v1 of "Introduce
>> CONFIG_DOMCTL" was submitted in time to still be eligible for taking into
>> 4.21, that - as indicated elsewhere - is moving us further in an unwanted
>> direction.
> 
> Do you mean that specifically this patch or the whole patch series is moving 
> us
> in unwanted direction? (1)

That series. We said we don't want individual CONFIG_SYSCTL, CONFIG_DOMCTL, etc.
Instead a single umbrella option wants introducing. Which means there series
doesn't need re-doing from scratch, but it may end up being a significant re-
work, especially considering that CONFIG_SYSCTL is already in the codebase and
hence now also needs replacing.

>>   Hence I'm not sure this can even be counted as an in-time
>> submission. Plus it looks to be pretty extensive re-work in some areas.
> 
> It doesn't clear based on change log why this patch is sent outside "Introduce
> CONFIG_DOMCTL" (2) as it looks the same as in (2) and it was reverted once 
> with
> the reason "for breaking the x86 build". (I haven't checked what was changed 
> so
> it won't lead to build issue again.)

Before we can even consider further work in the intended direction, the present
randconfig build issue wants sorting. Which supposedly this patch alone does.

Jan

Reply via email to