Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 16 Aug 2022 15:47:53 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] vfio-pci/zdev: require KVM to be built-in | From | Pierre Morel <> |
| |
Randy,
I need to provide the correction patch rapidly. Without answer I will propose the patch.
Regards, Pierre
On 8/16/22 09:55, Pierre Morel wrote: > > > On 8/16/22 08:04, Randy Dunlap wrote: >> Hi-- >> >> On 8/15/22 02:43, Pierre Morel wrote: >>> Thank you Randy for this good catch. >>> However forcing KVM to be include statically in the kernel when using >>> VFIO_PCI extensions is not a good solution for us I think. >>> >>> I suggest we better do something like: >>> >>> ---- >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h >>> b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h >>> index 6287a843e8bc..1733339cc4eb 100644 >>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h >>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h >>> @@ -1038,7 +1038,7 @@ static inline void >>> kvm_arch_vcpu_unblocking(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) {} >>> #define __KVM_HAVE_ARCH_VM_FREE >>> void kvm_arch_free_vm(struct kvm *kvm); >>> >>> -#ifdef CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM >>> +#if defined(CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM) || >>> defined(CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM_MODULE) >> >> This all looks good except for the line above. >> It should be: >> >> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM) >> >> Thanks. > > Yes, better, thanks. > How do we do? Should I repost it with reported-by you or do you want to > post it? > > Pierre > > >> >> >>> int kvm_s390_pci_register_kvm(struct zpci_dev *zdev, struct kvm *kvm); >>> void kvm_s390_pci_unregister_kvm(struct zpci_dev *zdev); >>> #else >>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig b/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig >>> index f9d0c908e738..bbc375b028ef 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig >>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/Kconfig >>> @@ -45,9 +45,9 @@ config VFIO_PCI_IGD >>> endif >>> >>> config VFIO_PCI_ZDEV_KVM >>> - bool "VFIO PCI extensions for s390x KVM passthrough" >>> + def_tristate y >>> + prompt "VFIO PCI extensions for s390x KVM passthrough" >>> depends on S390 && KVM >>> - default y >>> help >>> Support s390x-specific extensions to enable support for >>> enhancements >>> to KVM passthrough capabilities, such as interpretive >>> execution of >>> >>> ---- >>> >>> What do you think? It seems to me it solves the problem, what do you >>> think? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Pierre >> >> >
-- Pierre Morel IBM Lab Boeblingen
| |