On 08/16/2018 05:58 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On 08/16/2018 06:48 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 08/16/2018 05:16 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: >>> In some BSD systems RDMA migration is possible while >>> the pvrdma device can't be used because the mremap system call >>> is missing. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel.apfelb...@gmail.com> >>> --- >>> configure | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >>> hw/rdma/Makefile.objs | 2 +- >>> 2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> [...] >>> diff --git a/hw/rdma/Makefile.objs b/hw/rdma/Makefile.objs >>> index 3504c39d21..bd36cbf51c 100644 >>> --- a/hw/rdma/Makefile.objs >>> +++ b/hw/rdma/Makefile.objs >>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >>> -ifeq ($(CONFIG_RDMA),y) >>> +ifeq ($(CONFIG_PVRDMA),y) >>> obj-$(CONFIG_PCI) += rdma_utils.o rdma_backend.o rdma_rm.o >>> obj-$(CONFIG_PCI) += vmw/pvrdma_dev_ring.o vmw/pvrdma_cmd.o \ >>> vmw/pvrdma_qp_ops.o vmw/pvrdma_main.o >>> > >> Again: > > Sorry for not seeing the comment earlier. > >> Shouldn't the CONFIG_PVRDMA only guard the second line? I thought >> the first list should be fine with CONFIG_RDMA? > > Indeed, theoretically the first line can be compiled with CONFIG_RDMA, > however the only code that utilize the first line .o files is the pvrdma > code. > So we will simply have a bigger binary without any reason.
Ok, thanks for the explanation! Patch looks fine to me in that case, so: Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com>
