On 12/4/20 6:37 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 06:14:07PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >> On 11/30/20 3:35 AM, Claudio Fontana wrote: >>> From: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> accel/tcg/cputlb.c | 6 +++--- >>> accel/tcg/user-exec.c | 6 +++--- >>> include/hw/core/cpu.h | 9 --------- >>> include/hw/core/tcg-cpu-ops.h | 12 ++++++++++++ >>> target/alpha/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/arm/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/avr/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/cris/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/hppa/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/i386/tcg-cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/lm32/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/m68k/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/microblaze/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/mips/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/moxie/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/nios2/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/openrisc/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/ppc/translate_init.c.inc | 2 +- >>> target/riscv/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/rx/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/s390x/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/sh4/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/sparc/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/tilegx/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/tricore/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/unicore32/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> target/xtensa/cpu.c | 2 +- >>> 27 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-) >> >> With cc->tcg_ops.* guarded with #ifdef CONFIG_TCG: >> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> > > Thanks! > > Are the #ifdefs a hard condition for your Reviewed-by?
No, as you said, this is fine as a first step, so you can include them. > Even if we agree #ifdef CONFIG_TCG is the way to go, I don't > think this should block a series that's a step in the right > direction. It can be done in a separate patch. > > (Unless the lack of #ifdef introduces regressions, of course) I'm worried about the +system -tcg build configuration. s390x is the only target testing for such regressions (see "[s390x] Clang (disable-tcg)" on Travis-CI.
