Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Apr 2020 08:32:24 -0400 | From | "Michael S. Tsirkin" <> | Subject | Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 15 (vdpa) |
| |
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 12:07:06PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2020/4/16 上午12:16, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On 4/14/20 10:22 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Changes since 20200414: > > > > > on x86_64: > > > > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_set_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined! > > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_init_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined! > > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_iov_push_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined! > > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_iov_pull_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined! > > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_complete_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined! > > ERROR: modpost: "vringh_getdesc_iotlb" [drivers/vdpa/vdpa_sim/vdpa_sim.ko] undefined! > > > > > > Full randconfig file is attached. > > > > The config has > > CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=m > CONFIG_VHOST_RING=y > > But we don't select VHOST_IOTLB in VHOST_RING after commit > e6faeaa128417("vhost: drop vring dependency on iotlb"). Which seems wrong. > > Thanks
Well selecting IOTLB from ring breaks configs which don't need IOTLB.
Legal configurations are:
CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=y CONFIG_VHOST_RING=n
CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=m CONFIG_VHOST_RING=n
CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=n CONFIG_VHOST_RING=n
CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=y CONFIG_VHOST_RING=y
CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=n CONFIG_VHOST_RING=y
CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=n CONFIG_VHOST_RING=m
CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=y CONFIG_VHOST_RING=m
CONFIG_VHOST_IOTLB=m CONFIG_VHOST_RING=m
So VHOST_RING=y and VHOST_IOTLB=m is the only illegal one.
-- MST
| |