On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:06:10 +0200 Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 17.08.2017 14:55, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > On 17.08.2017 14:35, Thomas Huth wrote: > >> On 17.08.2017 13:40, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > >>> On 08/17/2017 06:22 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > [...] > >>>> feat-src = $(SRC_PATH)/target/$(TARGET_BASE_ARCH)/ > >>>> diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu.h b/target/s390x/cpu.h > >>>> index 74d5b35..aeb730c 100644 > >>>> --- a/target/s390x/cpu.h > >>>> +++ b/target/s390x/cpu.h > >>>> @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ > >>>> #include "exec/cpu-all.h" > >>>> #include "fpu/softfloat.h" > >>>> +#include "kvm_s390x.h" > >> > >> Do we still need that? cpu.h should theoretically be independent from > >> kvm now, shouldn't it? And for the .c files, it's likely better to > >> include kvm_s390x.h directly there if they require it. > > > > It should work if: > > > > a) we include "sysemu/kvm.h" in hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c > > b) we include "target/s390x/kvm_s390x.h" in hw/intc/s390_flic_kvm.c > > c) we include "kvm_s390x.h" in "internal.h" > > d) we drop the "KVMState" parameter from kvm_s390_get_memslot_count() > > (separate patch) > > Ok, that's rather a lot of changes already. Maybe that's rather > something for a later patch instead, so I'm also fine if you keep in > #include "kvm_s390x.h" in cpu.h here. Yup, let's defer it. It's not like that is the last series that will ever go in.
