Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 21/23] x86: expose CONFIG_HVM

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 28.08.18 at 14:14, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 28/08/18 12:50, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 26.08.18 at 14:19, <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/Kconfig
>>> @@ -60,6 +60,12 @@ config PV_LINEAR_PT
>>>  
>>>  config HVM
>>>     def_bool y
>>> +   prompt "HVM / PVH support"
>>> +   ---help---
>>> +     Interfaces to support HVM and PVH guests.
> 
> This definitely needs more than a single line...
> 
>>> +
>>> +     If unsure, say Y.
>>> +
>>>  
>>>  config SHADOW_PAGING
>> No double blank lines please.
>>
>> My previously voiced reservations wrt the shim remain. I continue
>> to disagree with Andrew that the symbol needs to be visible in a
>> shim-only config, and I continue to demand as a minimum that the
>> default here be N in that case if the symbol really is to remain visible.
> 
> Conditionally influencing the default is fine.  Hiding the symbol is not.
> 
> To be very very clear, I will nack/revert any patch which tries to
> insert a dependency here.  I find your reasoning to be wrong, and
> sufficiently short sighted and detrimental to users, that I'm not going
> to let the patch in.

Since iirc you didn't respond to my most recent comment on v1 here,
I would have very much hoped you'd explain your position a little
better than just claiming that the symbol becoming invisible with a
dependency added is a bad thing. I'm certainly open to (good)
arguments, but I'm not accepting a plain statement without proper
explanation.

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel