On Mon, 2022-12-12 at 18:07 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 12/9/22 10:55, David Woodhouse wrote: > > config KVM > > bool > > + imply XEN_EMU if (I386 || X86_64) > > No need for the "imply", just make it "default y" below and it will have > the same effect. > > > > > diff --git a/target/Kconfig b/target/Kconfig > > index 83da0bd293..e19c9d77b5 100644 > > --- a/target/Kconfig > > +++ b/target/Kconfig > > @@ -18,3 +18,7 @@ source sh4/Kconfig > > source sparc/Kconfig > > source tricore/Kconfig > > source xtensa/Kconfig > > + > > +config XEN_EMU > > + bool > > + depends on KVM && (I386 || X86_64) > > Please place it in hw/xen/Kconfig.
Perhaps I misunderstand, but I'm not sure that is consistent with what Philippe was asking for in https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/d203e13d-e2f9-5816-030d-c1449bde3...@linaro.org/ specifically: >> I rather have hw/ and target/ features disentangled, so I'd use >> CONFIG_XEN_EMU under target/ and CONFIG_XENFV_MACHINE under hw/, >> eventually having CONFIG_XEN_EMU depending on CONFIG_XENFV_MACHINE >> and -- for now -- CONFIG_KVM. The idea there seems to be that XEN_EMU is a *target* feature since it covers the support in target/i386/kvm. But yes, it *also* covers the devices I'm adding to hw/i386/kvm. Do I want a *separate* config symbol for that? Or just make those depend on XENFV_MACHINE && XEN_EMU ? I'll move XEN_EMU to hw/i386/Kconfig for now, thereby doing what *neither* of you said (I don't think hw/xen/Kconfig is the best choice when the *code* it enables is under hw/i386/kvm?)
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
