On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.w...@oracle.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 11:31:08AM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Juergen Gross <jgr...@suse.com> wrote: >> > On 02/17/2015 01:25 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez >> >> <mcg...@do-not-panic.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> As it is per our agreed upon changes we can in theory enable a >> >>> XEN_PVHVM system without XEN_PV or XEN_PVH. If this is indeed >> >>> desirable this poses an issue at build time >> >> >> >> >> >> And this also raises the question of whether or not we should make >> >> XEN_PVHVM a user selectable option, right now it is a def_bool and is >> >> therefore not human selectable. You can implicitly disable it by >> >> disabling PCI for example though. If we want that to be exposed to the >> >> user we can then enable some description of what that means, and the >> >> user will then be able to read / select / enable XEN_PV., XEN_PVHVM, >> >> XEN_PVH. Right now they'd only be able to select XEN_PV and/or >> >> XEN_PVH, XEN_PVHVM is implicit. >> > >> > >> > I think making XEN_PVHVM user selectable is okay. >> >> OK I'll enable this then. > > Please don't. We had bugs in the past because distros did not select > it (they made it an module) and the PV drivers were not loaded.
Oy vey. > There should be an history in the git tree behind the desire to make > it non selectable. OK how about we enable the user selection only under CONFIG_EXPERT, otherwise make it hidden. Luis _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
